• Start
  • Previous
  • 17 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 19340 / Download: 5436
Size Size Size
Avicenna [Ibn Sina]: His life (980-1037) and Work

Avicenna [Ibn Sina]: His life (980-1037) and Work

Author:
Publisher: Allen & Unwin
English

1

2

3

4

5

6

CHAPTER VIII: AVICENNA AND THE EAST

Of all Avicenna’s successors three stand far above the rest. Ghazali rose to become the greatest religious thinker in Islam, Suhrawardi the originator of a philosophy of illumination, and Averroes the most competent commentator of Aristotle. The first attacked him damagingly for the incoherence of his system of thought, and his betrayal of the fundamentals of his Faith. The second added to his rational reasoning visions of illuminative knowledge. And the third reproached him for failing to understand the Stagirite and in consequence misrepresenting him. Nevertheless he had a number of followers, and his influence persisted in a continuous tradition down to modern times.

A general reaction against philosophy set in soon after his death. The wave of strict orthodoxy that had already started in Baghdad, spread now all over the Islamic world. The Caliphs tried to retrieve their rapidly waning secular power by reviving the religious spirit and enjoining the necessity of careful adherence to dogma. Nor was the political situation propitious. First came the Seljuk Turks conquering one Emirate after another; then hordes of Mongols poured in, routing and ruining all that stood in their way; until with the sack of Baghdad in 1258 they turned the whole country into desolation. And when the Safavid dynasty restored the old Persian empire, sectarian repression left little room for freedom of thought and speculation.

Avicenna had a number of pupils, though none of them rose to great distinction. We are told that he had one by the name of Kirmani who was in the habit of arguing with the master continually until it led to an exchange of “disrespectful” words. Bahmanyar, a Zoroastrian, was more appreciative and his questions were answered in a book that was called The Discussions. Ibn Zaila was his favorite because of his keen interest in the subject. And Masumi was the most learned. It was for him that Avicenna wrote the Book on Love. When he became involved in a bitter controversy with Beruni, Masumi asked to be allowed to reply in his stead. Some of the writings of Bahmanyar and Ibn Zaila have survived. After them came a host of minor figures who generation after generation occupied themselves with what came to be known as hikmat - a term originally signifying wisdom, but gradually coming to mean medicine, or philosophy or all sorts of occult sciences. It is safe to say that there was not a single hakim after Avicenna who did not come under his influence and incorporate into his own thought a good deal of his ideas. The debt was sometimes acknowledged, but not always. Almost as much may be said of religious thinkers of all shades of opinion. Even when refuting his arguments or denouncing his irreligion, they did not hesitate to retain many of his thoughts and attitudes that had penetrated into all forms of literature including poetry. His philosophical system may have proved most objectionable, yet there was his medical works that everybody appreciated, and his logic which became universally adopted and eventually a subject of careful study in the seminaries. In fact there was always a tendency to separate what they considered useful writings from his disquieting speculations already condemned by religious leaders.

Opposition came constantly from two sides: one the mystic Sufis and the other the theologians. This was in itself a proof of his widespread influence.

The Sufis deprecated his faith in human reason as a means to knowledge. His rationalism, they said, veiled the Face of God instead of leading man to Him. Sufism was spreading far and wide in those days. And the suffering brought by repeated wars and invasions caused many to choose the mystic path and find comfort in its attitude of resignation. Sanai (d. 1150) in his passionate praise of the Almighty, found only pity for Avicenna groping in the darkness of his man-made system. And Jami (d. 1492), writing five centuries after the philosopher, when his influence was still strong, exhorts people not to seek the light of the soul from the barren breast of Avicenna, for only those with open eyes can show the rest how and where to find the light. His Isharat leads to blasphemy; and his conception of the world fills man with forebodings of evil. His book of Healing (Shifa) will surely cause illness; and his book of Deliverance (Najat) betrays a sense of bondage. Even in his Canon of Medicine he has nothing new to say. The same unfavorable attitude was taken by other Sufis who had no use for logical reasoning in man’s lifelong quest after God. Not until Ibn al-Arabi (d. 1240) came to blend philosophy, theology and mysticism together, had there been any attempt to take a more conciliatory view of rational thought. And Jami's poem proves that it had been of no avail. The Sufis still persisted in denouncing all that Avicenna stood for, though they did not hesitate to copy the form of some of his writings.

The opposition of the theologians was just as violent, but some of them chose to reason and argue. Of these the most eminent thinker was Ghazali, a countryman of Avicenna, who started as a rationalist, developed into a religious philosopher, and ended as a mystic. In many ways he may be compared to St. Augustine. Coming less than a hundred years after Avicenna, Ghazali went through the regular form of education in those days, and besides the usual Islamic studies he also delved into the writings of the Falasifa. His early interest in logic is shown by a number of works on the subject. It was not long, however, before he became entirely absorbed by the study of religious law and Muslim jurisprudence, and as a result found himself in total disagreement with the philosophical systems of those days. It was then, while a professor at the Nizamiyya College in Baghdad, that he undertook the treatise which he called The Incoherence of the Philosphers. This book proved of profound and lasting influence in the Islamic world - both in the east and in Andalusia. For many it was the final refutation of all that the Falasifa had taught, and there is no doubt that it was highly valued at the time. In Ghazali the contrast between Falasifa and Mutakallemun is seen very clearly, each group with a special approach and with a style and terminology of its own. Point by point he repeats the arguments of the former only to give the religious explanation based on the fundamental teachings of the Faith. His method was later adopted by many others.

Accepting Farabi and Avicenna as representative figures among the Falasifa he quotes extensively from the latter to show the incoherence of their speculations and the contradictions in their statements with regard to the Science of the Divine. “Logic is not their prerogative”, he declares, “and may be usefully employed by everybody. It is in the field of metaphysics that they have gone astray, denying that religious laws are of divine origin, and assuming that they are traditional conventions established in the course of time. The very basis of their thought is unjustified because they have failed to realize that the realities of those matters that pertain to God cannot be attained through intellectual theorizing”. What they have done is to grope “in darkness upon darkness. There are certain questions on which there need be no quarrel with them, as in the use of their terminology, and their desire to call God an artificer who is a pure substance not existing in any body nor constituted by anything besides itself. Nor should we make objection to their explanations of natural phenomena like eclipses, because they do not run counter to the principles of religion. It is when they deny that the world was created ex nihilo, and refuse to accept the divine attributes, and insist that the belief in the Resurrection is false, that they have to be combated and proved to be in grievous error”. With that purpose in view, he takes up twenty different points on which the philosophers have gone against religious teachings, challenging their arguments and condemning their theories.

The first and the most essential point of conflict is the assertion that the world existed since pre-eternity and will last till post-eternity. This claim cannot possibly be conceded because with Muslims there is nothing eternal except God and his attributes, and all else is created. Avicenna may ask why, if the world be considered as created, the act of creation took place at a specific time and not before or after. The answer to that is that its existence was not desired before that time its existence was accomplished because it came to be desired after being not desired, so that it was Will that came into force. Moreover, when the world and all therein is placed in the category of the possible by the philosopher, it should be remembered that if its existence was possible, so was its non-existence. The world came to be, when it came to be, and in the form in which it came to be, and at the time in which it came to be, through Will. Nor is Time eternal. That too originated in the act of creation. God is prior to the world and to time. He was when there was no world, and He was and with Him a world, existence and non-existence of all things depend on two things, God’s will and His Power. It is in these that all things have their source and origin, and it is by them that all existing beings may be explained. Avicenna has attached undue importance to his division of beings into the possible, the impossible and the necessary. These are mental propositions that do not need an existent being in order to be attributed to it. In other words, they are purely logical considerations that do not necessarily have a corresponding existence in the world. They may be useful distinctions to make in the world of concepts, but their ontological application is a totally different matter. The philosophers are united in the belief that it is impossible to prove knowledge, power and will in the First Principle, and that is why they resort to such ideas. They are prepared to call God the Agent. But an agent is he who commits some sort of act, and if he does so it is because he wishes and he wills, and if there is choice involved then there must be knowledge. And if there is choice and knowledge and will then there must also be the power to consummate the act. Otherwise God would not be an artificer nor an agent except figuratively. Moreover the very meaning of an act is doing something. It denotes bringing something out of non-existence into existence. And that is what is meant when it is said that the world was created. If the philosophers do not think so then say openly that God is not puissant enough to commit an act that it may become clear that your belief is contrary to the religion of the Muslim.

Farabi and Avicenna proceed, in addition, to explain prophecy rationally by attributing to the prophet unusual powers of insight and imagination through which he is enabled to foresee coming events and foretell things that the common man is unable to detect. They have indeed failed to realize that it is by way of inspiration and not by way of reasoning that God grants knowledge to His prophets. They neither guess nor do they imagine, they are informed directly and not through logical reasoning.

As regards natural philosophy, religious teachings neither accept nor deny its claims. It has no quarrel with the shar, which is the religious law, except on certain specific issues over which it is impossible to compromise. It may be thought that the Resurrection of the body is contrary to the principles of natural philosophy. And it may be asked what proof is there of the existence of a Paradise or of eternal fire after death. The answer is that God is omnipotent and therefore capable of providing all and everything that He deems. Thus on three principal points the philosophers have been led into grave error by their speculations. They have claimed that the world is eternal and that the separate substances are so likewise. They have maintained that God has no direct knowledge of particular things and individuals. And they have denied the Resurrection of the body after death. Those who say such things must believe that the prophets have lied and that all that they have asserted so emphatically was meant to make the common people believe in things which they thought was good for them. In other words they were not making a statement of fact but of convenience. “And this is blasphemy”.

Ghazali’s arguments in favor of creation ex nihilo, God’s knowledge of all particulars, and the resurrection of the dead became widely accepted in the Islamic world, and when translated into Latin was adopted by the Christians and employed in many Scholastic treatises. His clear and forceful reasoning could not fail to appeal to those who took the religious viewpoint. But less than a hundred years after him, Averroes (d. 1198) came to champion the cause of Aristotle against both the theologians and those of the Falasifa who had failed to grasp the true import of what the Stagirite had taught. With no less zeal than Ghazali, he embarked on an Incoherence of the Incoherence, a book known in its Latin translation as Destructio Destructionis. This was received in almost complete silence in the Islamic world which tried to ignore it. The Jews of Andalusia and the Latins on the other hand, having a far better opinion of Averroes than the Arabs, gladly took it up and translated it into Hebrew and Latin a number of times. And this made it the subject of innumerable commentaries. The two works taken together epitomize better than any others the essential problems arising from the impact of classical philosophy on religious teachings. Averroes undertakes a restatement of the position of the philosophers. Ghazali had quoted passage after passage from Avicenna, then showed the supposed incoherence of his arguments; now Averroes quotes passage after passage from the book of Ghazali to show the incoherence of the réplique.

The disputation is rarely violent. If he condemns the sophistry of Ghazali, he just as often pays tribute to the justified objections of the theologian for some of whose penetrating remarks he shows appreciation. There is nothing puerile or vindictive in what each has to say, and that makes these two books important in the history of Islamic thought. The arguments centre almost entirely on the writings of Avicenna a proof of his dominating position. There is, however, one bold accusation that is worthy of note. Averroes openly states that Ghazali denounced all that Avicenna had said and all that the Falasifa stood for, not out of conviction, but out of fear lest he be ostracized like all the rest. This is repeated by Ibn Tumlus, his Andalusian pupil; though it is difficult to prove. He also claims that Avicenna modified and sometimes altered the ideas of Aristotle as a concession to the theologians. Again this is not something of which it is easy to find examples, though there was never any doubt of his desire to explore and establish if possible a common ground between the two groups. As a specific case Averroes mentions the state of the human soul after death. Avicenna had taken a middle position between those who thought that the souls of men join with and are reunited into one common soul, and the religious belief that they remain separate and individual, retaining their identity after the death of the body. He said the souls remain distinct, and in consequence are innumerable, but they may not retain the identity of the body which they had occupied. Was this said just “to delude the common people as Averroes thinks; or was Avicenna trying to arrive at a compromise between contrary views?”

With regard to the division of beings into the possible, the impossible and the necessary, he joins Ghazali in protesting that these are mental concepts that need not have an actual concrete existence. According to Averroes, Avicenna was not justified in basing his proof for the existence of God on a distinction that is purely logical. The Asharite theologians had said that all that is by nature possible, is created out of nothing. And Avicenna taking that notion and combining it with the idea of necessity, had produced his well-known argument. Nor should he be considered a faithful representative of the Peripatetics, because he frequently departs from them and takes a wholly independent course. In psychology he went counter to Aristotle by providing an estimative faculty in animals for which there is no special justification.

Averroes then proceeds to take exception to the distinction between essence and existence. Avicenna, he says, considers existence as something super-added to essence as though it were merely an accident; and that would make the existence of God conditional on His essence. This unjustified criticism fails to take into account that in the differentiation between the two, Avicenna had specifically said that in the Necessary Being essence and existence are one. These objections and many similar ones do not lead Averroes to disown the Islamic Falasifa completely. He blames Ghazali bitterly for claiming that they had committed blasphemy, and for making false accusations against them. This, he says, is a wrong done to the very religion that he pretends to uphold.

After Ghazali and before Averroes, Suhrawardi (d. 1191) came to attempt an entirely new orientation to the now established tradition of Avicennian thought. As the originator of the Illuminative philosophy he created a new current that was to run parallel; and though touching the main stream on many points, and on occasions borrowing freely, nevertheless remaining distinct and separate. Subsequent to that we find thinkers in Persia commonly divided into pure Avicennians, who were also sometimes called Peripatetics, and followers of the Illuminative philosophy. Suhrawardi added many new elements that were either indistinct or entirely absent in Avicenna. A strong tendency towards pantheism was one of them. But by far the most important development, for which one scholar has found some justification in the writings of his predecessor, is the urge towards a conception of a mystic Orient, the home of light and the dawning-place of knowledge and illumination, a lode-star that attracts the wayward soul in its life-long journey. A reference to that has already been noted in one of the mystic allegories of Avicenna. Suhrawardi makes it a definite goal; and for that purpose borrows heavily from Persian Pre-Islamic thought, especially the conception offarrah, for which the early Persians had many terms, and which signified a fountain-head of good fortune and glorious light that elevated and ennobled whomsoever it fell upon. It was the prerogative of great crowned heads for whom Suhrawardi now substitutes the righteous souls. This philosophy, for which he paid with his life, was a highly significant movement. His intellectual background had been the same as all the rest. Basically Islamic, he had gained a sufficient knowledge of Greek learning through the many translations and books of his predecessors; he was steeped in Arabic culture; and he had left his original country and was now a resident of Syria. Nevertheless he turns away from what had absorbed the minds of the philosophers and held such a devastating fascination, and from that doctrinal conformity which the theologians considered essential to a religious life. He faces what he believes to be the primordial temples of light, for which the soul in its “estrangement” must constantly yearn, and bereft of which it can never find peace. He reverts to some early Zoroastrian sources, including what was known as Zurvanism; and he transforms the Angels of God so prominent in religion, and whom Avicenna had equated with the separate Intelligences, into harbingers of Light.

Neither Ghazali’s passionate appeal to the fundamentals of religion; nor the reproaches of Averroes for a betrayal of Aristotle; nor indeed the flights of Suhrawardi towards the mystic Orient, put an end to the direct and pervading influence of Avicenna. At the eastern extremity of the Islamic world we find a Persian theologian of distinction, and of the same period as Averroes, rise to ridicule Ghazali’s authority. In spite of some bitter attacks, he comments favorably on a good deal that Avicenna had written. Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 1209), who considered Farabi the greatest of the Islamic philosophers, had also a high regard for Avicenna. He did not fail, either, to take into consideration the doctrines of Razi, the physician who, as the name shows, came from his home town. He goes to Transoxiana to meet the learned men of that region and finds them all deeply engaged in the study of Avicenna; and using his own commentary on the Isharat as an aid. In one place he is asked to repay the hospitality of his host for a rather lengthy stay, by explaining the Canon of Medicine and some of its obscure terms. And in another, he undertakes a commentary on one of the metaphysical works, copies of which have survived. Shahristani (d. 1153) the historian of religions and philosophies, had already paid tribute to Avicenna by the space he had allotted to him in his works, without in any way committing himself. But it should not be supposed that all theologians were so tolerant. Some years later we find a religious revivalist going to the other extreme, and condemning all and everything that any of the philosophers had said or written. As a fundamentalist, Ibn Taimiyya (d. 1328) denies that there is such a thing as Islamic philosophy, and that there could be philosophers calling themselves Muslims. Ghazali had not been averse to logic; and had taken a favorable view of its use as an instrument of thought; he, however, condemns it completely, and incidentally has some very penetrating remarks to make on the subject.

The list of those who were avowed followers, or who in spite of disagreement on some points openly admitted their debt to Avicenna, is long and distinguished. They naturally come mostly from his own country and the neighboring regions. The extent to which Nasir Khosrow (d. 1088) may have been influenced by him has not yet been determined. As a much younger contemporary, he became involved in Ismaili propaganda; and devoted his later years entirely to religious matters. And yet in his philosophical books, when discussing time and space and the faculties of the soul, often along Aristotelian lines, he shows traces of Avicennian terminology in Arabic and Persian. Like the authors of the Epistles, whose writings he must as an Ismaili have studied, he was anxious to combine Greek thought with religious teachings; and he is much concerned with the refutation of Razi, the physician, and his belief in the five eternals. He quotes the Mutazelites on occasion; and seems acquainted with the treatises of John Philoponus.

In Andalusia, at the western extremity of the Islamic world, it might be supposed that the influence of Farabi was on the whole stronger than that of Avicenna. And yet we find Ibn Baja (Avempace, d. 1138) and Ibn Tufail paying tribute to Avicenna and admitting their debt to him. The latter was particularly interested in his mystical works. After them came Ibn Tumlus (d. 1223) with his books on logic in which he draws freely from both Farabi and Avicenna. And Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), the great philosopher of history, is not without admiration for the genius of Bukhara, though he insists that religion and philosophy are two separate domains and have very little in common.

As regards Umar Khayyam (d. 1123), back in a great likelihood that he read Avicenna, whose works must have been fairly well known in his time. And the fact that some of the quatrains in Umar’s collection have been thought to be actually by Avicenna, shows the resemblance in sentiment and outlook between the two. Mathematics and astronomy could not have prevented the inquisitive Umar from delving into some aspects of metaphysics. And Avicenna’s ill-concealed fatalism must have proved a balm to the hurt mind of the poet; and urged him to administer it generously and openly to others.

By far the most competent and sympathetic commentator of Avicenna in Persia was Nasir el-Din Tusi (d. 1273). Though not a creative mind himself, he was an accomplished scholar and one of the most prolific of authors. He gave a fresh impetus to the study of his predecessor by writing the most detailed commentaries on some of his books, and by defending him against his detractors. What he wrote himself was also largely derived from the same source. With philosophy he had combined an interest in mathematics and astronomy rather than medicine; and he spent much time at an observatory recording his observations and preparing astronomical tables. He too had had connections with the Ismaili heterodoxy. In his early youth he was one of their adherents and had written books on their teachings. Then he changed allegiance and accepted the patronage of one of the Mongol chieftains, in whose name he produced the astronomical tables that were to become so widely used. Tusi, like many others in his time, was bilingual and wrote in both Arabic and Persian. In the former language, his commentary on the Isharat has proved invaluable to modern students of Avicenna. Others before and after him had tried to clarify the obscure points of this book, which is not by any means easy reading; and it should not be supposed that his comments elucidate all the subtleties of the original text. And yet they reflect the state of knowledge in his day, and point to the fact that it had not materially changed after the lapse of some three centuries. Creative thought was gradually being replaced by mere erudition; which eventually reached the stage of tiresome repetition interspersed by meaningless verbiage.

In Persian his writings include a commentary on the whole Aristotelian Organontogether with the Eisagoge of Porphyry, in which he follows the pattern and incorporates the substance of the Shifa with very few additions of his own. It is significant that he disregards the attempts of Avicenna and Nasir Khosrow to write in pure Persian, and uses instead the full Arabic terminology established by the early authors. This, however, leaves the value of the book unimpaired, even from the literary point of view, because its clear and concise exposition is superior to anything produced before him. Though still favored by the learned, Arabic was losing ground in certain parts of Persia; and we find him specially commissioned to put into the language of the people a book on Ethics by Miskawaih. He chooses to write one of his own based on what his predecessors had contributed on the subject, and that takes him beyond them to Plato and Aristotle. Beginning with the classification of the sciences, like so many others, he actually follows Avicenna in almost all that he has to say. In his early Ismaili days he had written a book on the soul and its faculties in the same tone and manner as the authors of the Epistles. Now he revokes all that and turns to Aristotle by way of Avicenna. His versatility had become proverbial, and his interests extended to history and belles-lettres. He has an account of the conquest of Baghdad by the Mongol Hulagu Khan, to which was added a translation of one of the literary works of Ibn al-Muqaffa into Persian. But in philosophy as well as in various other matters, his guide is invariably Avicenna.

A nephew of Tusi, commonly known as Baba Afdal, continued the tradition of learning in the family, and left a number of works remarkable for their style and substance. He followed the lead of Avicenna and Nasir Khosrow in the attempt to write in as pure a Persian as was possible in his days; and he borrowed the terms which they had employed. Why he should have chosen to depart from the practice of his uncle in this respect is not clear. The effort is, however, deliberate and successful. Although, he does not coin any new words himself, he arrives at a felicity of expression unusual among authors of philosophical works. There seems to have been some movement in his day to put various books of learning into Persian; and all that he wrote himself was in his mother-tongue; but that initiative suffered a setback not long after him. Some have found traces of Hermetism in his writings; and like Avicenna, with whose works he must have been quite familiar, whether in the original or through the commentaries of his uncle, he lays emphasis on the correspondence between celestial souls and angels. This was to become a popular theme in prose and poetry. His interest in translation made him produce a good rendering of Aristotle’s De Anima from Arabic into Persian, probably for the first time, as well as some pseudo-Aristotelian treatises, like the Book of the Apple, which had become very popular in its Arabic version.

Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi (d. 1311), a contemporary and associate of Tusi, also supposed to have been a nephew of Sadi the poet, was primarily a physician, though his interests extended to philosophy and kindred subjects. He co-operated for some time with Tusi in the preparation of his astronomical tables; and travelled extensively in Turkey and Syria, often dressed as a Sufi. A man of wide knowledge, his occupation with medicine led him to undertake a commentary on the Avicennian Canon; and among numerous works in Arabic he produced a lengthy exposition of the Illuminative philosophy of Suhrawardi; thus showing the two traditions running parallel. In Persian, besides various treatises on astronomy and the natural sciences, he wrote a voluminous book incorporating the form as well as much of the materials of the Shifa. And in a tractate on the principles of physical geography he draws a comparison between the views of Avicenna and Razi, the theologian. He has hardly anything new to say in any of his works, but he writes in a clear and simple style; and his published correspondence makes pleasant reading.

There had been many minor theologians during this period who had discussed the philosophical system of Avicenna at length, thus testifying to its pervasive and widespread influence. More important were the numerous manuals of logic that appeared and were taught in the recognized seminaries throughout the country. They were all substantially Avicennian with practically no additions. Some of these handbooks are free of the unnecessary explanations and therefore serve a useful purpose.

At the opening of the sixteenth century the Safawi dynasty inaugurated an important period in the political history of Persia. Reviving the sense of Persian nationality, it restored the Empire almost to its ancient Sasanian limits after the lapse of more than eight centuries; and made of it a nation once again, self-contained, centripetal, powerful and respected. A distinct feature of this revival was that it was based more on considerations of religion than of language and race. Their enmity with the Turkish people on the west was more sectarianly religious than political; and their appeal to their own countrymen was on the same level. In consequence of this - and it has been noted by many scholars - we find that whereas art and architecture nourished to a remarkable extent and there were some great miniature-painters, literature suffered lamentably. All throughout the two centuries that marked the duration of this dynasty, poetry was at a very low ebb; and such literary men as did exist and had any talent of their own, chose to emigrate to India and seek the patronage of the Great Moguls there. The rulers had no use or sympathy for mystics and philosophers, though the greatest emphasis was laid on religious dogma, and the theologians enjoyed every aid and encouragement. Hence it was that 'under this dynasty learning, culture, poetry and mysticism completely deserted Persia, and in place of great poets and philosophers there arose theologians, great indeed, but harsh, dry, fanatical and formal. It might be added that even of those that turned their eyes and feet towards India none was a thinker or philosopher of any merit, and in fact it was recognized and admitted that this period produced nothing of importance in that field.

And yet within the narrow limits of theology certain developments took place that had their importance in the history of Persian thought. The Shia branch of Islam to which the Safawi kings and their subjects zealously adhered, had been always dominated by the doctrine of the Imam, i.e. the vice-regent or leader of the Faith. The first Imam had been Ali the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet; and he had been followed by eleven others from among his descendants, thus making twelve in all. The doctrine of the Imamate was a fundamental principle and an essential part of religion. And since the founder of the Safawi dynasty proudly claimed descent from the seventh Imam, it was only natural that they should be militant advocates of the doctrine and take every measure for its propagation. Moreover, it was equally natural for the theologians who enjoyed their patronage and benefited from their bounty to devote a great deal of their attention and much of their writing to this subject. Its interest for us here lies in the fact that judging from their works, it has been found that Avicenna exerted a penetrating influence on the religious thinkers of this period; and that many elements of his system were grafted upon the conception of the Imamate as they propounded it. The same is true in a good measure of Suhrawardi and his views of emanations of Illuminative light. The upshot was a fresh impetus to the study of the works of these two men which left a permanent effect on the authors of the period. Thus at the school of Mir Damad (d. 1632) Avicenna and Suhrawardi helped to produce a religious blend in contrast to the many philosophical blends of which they had been the chief ingredients.

The theologians of the Shia branch of Islam may be said to have enjoyed a greater latitude in religious speculation than the others. For them the doors of initiative were wide open; and many were those who taking advantage of that, indulged in a good measure of independent thought. It led them sometimes far astray from strict orthodoxy, but helped to widen their horizon and give them an opportunity to take note of the philosophical movements that had appeared in the country. Under the aegis of the Safawi kings they discarded the usual practice of writing exclusively in Arabic which by the sixteenth century had become a foreign language except to a very few; and began producing works in Persian mostly in the form of popular treatises easily comprehensible to the public. At the same time they became divided into fundamentalists of different denominations, and into what have been called “latitudinarians”. It is among the latter group that we find those who played a part in grafting Avicennian thought on to some of the religious conceptions of the period. Their minds were more open than the rest, and like Suhrawardi, they fell under the influence of some early Zoroastrian beliefs presented in Islamic garb. Metaphysics came to take a new orientation and traditional cosmology became appreciably modified. On the one hand there was Majlisi, the eminent theologian, and his still more learned and celebrated son, laying down the fundamentals of the Shia faith in the most authoritative and uncompromising tone; and on the other various semi-heterodox groupings like the Sufis with, their attachment to pantheism, or the Shaikhis who were now increasing in number.

Those who may be called the philosophers of the period fall into two categories. The majority of them were essentially religious thinkers. Only one or two, as will be seen, allowed themselves to follow their thought wherever it might lead them, and refused to have it conditioned by and subordinated to religious dogma. Of the first perhaps the most famous is commonly known as Mir Damad (d. 1631). He stood in high favor with Shah Abbas the Great, and spent most of his life in the capital at Isfahan, where he had a large circle of pupils and admirers. With a taste for natural history and philosophy, he wrote mostly in Arabic, but he wrote poetry in Persian under the pen-name of Ishraq, meaning illumination. The choice of this word betrayed his inclination towards the Illuminative philosophy of Suhrawardi which he could not openly profess. In a work entitled Qisas al-Ulama (Tales of the Theologians) it is related that Mulla Sadra, his pupil and son-in-law, saw him in a dream and said, “My views do not differ from yours, yet I am denounced as an infidel and you are not. Why is this?”. “Because” replied Mir Damad’s spirit, ·I have written on philosophy in such wise that the theologians are unable to understand my meaning, which only the philosophers can understand; while you write about philosophical questions in such a manner that every dominie and hedge-priest who sees your books understands what you mean and dubs you an unbeliever”. Mir Damad and his pupils were in fact all very much influenced by both Avicenna and Suhrawardi, though he took great pains, as the anecdote shows, to conceal his views carefully under a veil of religious conformity. He had been attracted by Avicenna’s mystic writings and allegories; and letters have survived in which, he refers to them and answers questions about them. The opinion then generally held of Avicenna and Suhrawardi is reflected in another little story in which one man sees the Prophet in his dream and inquires what is his attitude to Avicenna. “He is a man whom God made to lose his way through knowledge” the spirit replies”. “And what of Suhra-wardi?”. “He was just his follower” he is told.

Notwithstanding this evidence of the prevailing disapproval of what the two men were supposed to stand for, we find a son-in-law of Mir Damad by the name of Seyyid Ahmad 'Alawi undertaking a voluminous commentary on the Shifa entitled the Key to the Shifa, in which he amplifies the cosmology of Avicenna by introducing a good measure of Zurvanism from Zoroastrian sources, and frequently invoking the spirit if not the letter of Suhrawardi’s writings. He projects the Zoroastrian dualism on to the field of Avicennian thought. In connection with the way in which the multiple could proceed from the one, a subject that Avicenna had treated in his metaphysics, he quotes Pythagoras to the effect that if one should proceed from the primal cause, so does not-one; then goes on to illustrate his point by bringing forward the case of Zoroaster who, he says, taught that if from the First Being there is produced an angel called Yazdan, there is also produced from the shade of that Being a demon called Ahriman. One stands for the Good and the other for Evil. The metaphor of the shade implies a necessary consequence of the emanation of Light.

Findareski (d. 1640) was another religious thinker of the period who devoted a good deal of attention to philosophy. Highly esteemed at the court of Shah Abbas in Isfahan, he usually went about in the garb of a humble dervish, and fell under the influence of that combination of Avicenna and Suhrawardi which was to incline many towards Zoroastrian ideas. The strict religious conformity that prevailed at the royal court did not suit him, and was one reason for his departure to India were he imbibed a good deal of Zoroastrian as well as Hindu thought. Perhaps for that reason little is known about his later days except that he returned to die in his own country.

The first to occupy himself with serious philosophical thought was Mulla Sadra (d. 1640), unanimously accounted the greatest philosopher of modern times in Persia. Though the only son of an aged father, he left his native Shiraz to study philosophy in Isfahan; and there sat at the feet of Mir Damad and Findareski, among other renowned teachers. Having obtained his authorization to teach, he retired for some time to a little village where he lived an austere life and spent his days in study and meditation. He suffered a good deal at the hand of the orthodox divines, and never relished their company. Many times he made the Pilgrimage to Mecca on foot; and died in Basra on the return from his seventh journey, leaving a son who denounced and controverted his father’s teachings; and boasted that his belief was that of the common people. He had married the daughter of Mir Damad, who had given him his blessing with permission to expound his works. That did not last long, and he soon parted company with the teachings of his father-in-law. In choosing his own path he became surrounded by a constantly growing number of pupils who held him in great esteem and veneration. He lectured in Isfahan and, on his occasional travels, at different centres in the country. It was necessary for him not to be too outspoken in his views, which, needless to say, did not always conform with orthodoxy. A prolific author, his best known works written in Arabic, are his al-Asfar al-Arbaa (The Four Books) and his Shawahid al-Rububiyya (Evidences of Divinity) which have been lithographed in Tehran. He also had a commentary on the Avicennian Shifa, and another on the Hikmat al-Ishraq which is none other than the philosophy of illumination of Suhrawardi. One book is significantly called Kasr al-Asnam al-Jahillyya (The Breaking of the Idols of Ignorance); and the title of another isKitab al-Hidaya (The book of Guidance). Count Gobineau, writing perhaps more from hearsay than personal knowledge, asserts that Mulla Sadra was “pas un inventeur, ni un createur, c’est un restaurateur seulement”. Actually this is not far from the truth, though the philosopher of Shiraz did not restore the pure Avicennian thought as the French diplomat supposed. It was rather a combination of it with the more congenial orientations of Suhrawardi. To his own countrymen he was known as a man who had denounced the Peripatetic and Stoic elements in Avicenna; and who had restated and in a sense reformed the Illuminative philosophy.

If we take Asfar al-Arbaa (The Four Books) as representative of Mulla Sadra’s work, we find that in spite of Gobineau’s disparaging, it has some highly valuable features that distinguish it from many other books of the same kind. First and foremost, it should be noted that unlike his predecessors, he states his authorities for his quotations wherever necessary; and by mentioning their works he not only reveals his sources, but incidentally gives us a very complete picture of the different currents that flowed into the main stream of Islamic philosophical thought. Only from an exposition like this can the variety and complexity of the great synthesis be gauged. He often quotes in order to express disagreement, thereby demonstrating his critical powers; this also furnishes evidence that he had access to some minor Avicennian treatises, including the correspondence with his personal pupils, that modern scholars have not so far been able to trace. In general outline as well as in subject-matter he follows the metaphysics of the Shifa; and for the reader’s benefit gives, side by side with the views of Avicenna, those of many others before and after him, not forgetting Suhrawardi and the views of the illuminati on every problem. To all these he often adds his own, boldly beginning with “and I say”. Moreover, he frequently refers to Pre-Islamic Persian philosophers, and their conceptions of light as the true essence and reality of existence. He sometimes calls them the “Pahlawi thinkers”, and in other passages “the Chosroesians”, obviously meaning followers of Zoroastrian thought which he did not wish to mention specifically. He also throws light on many disputed points in the Avicennian system, the discussion of which has occupied modern scholars. In the course of a long discussion on contingency which he calls imkan, he refutes, with many quotations from Avicenna, the view which has lately been expressed that there is no notion of contingency as distinct from mere possibility in Avicenna. He mentions the subject because he is unable to accept the rigid determinism of his predecessor with regard to the belief that creation takes place necessarily. He is inclined to the religious conception of contingency, which, he complains, is not at all envisaged in the Theology that is “only attributed” to the First Teacher, i.e.Aristotle. While to the distinction between essence and existence and their union in God he gives his full support in stressing at the same time that reality is one and single, and that all else is existent through the illuminations of its light and the effulgence of its essence. Here he quotes an Arabic verse to the effect that “all things in this world are false appearances or idle imaginings, or just reflections in mirrors and in shades”. God for him as for Avicenna was the Necessary Being, but to this conception he adds a thought that he expressed in the form of an axiom, and that his pupils were very fond of elaborating. “The Necessary Being”, he says, “is a simple reality extremely simple he is everything... and yet... not a single thing proceeds from him”. This has been explained in many and sometimes conflicting ways which we need not go into except to say that he was anxious to detach himself from pantheistic ideas often attributed to Suhrawardi. Time and movement, in his view, were not preceded by anything except the Deity and His power and command which some people choose to call His attributes, others angels, and which the Platonists designate as the divine Forms; this is because people have their own ways in the things they are enamoured of. Though he expresses surprise over the heated discussion between theologians and philosophers with regard to the question whether the world was created or is eternal, he very discreetly arrives at the conclusion that matter must be considered eternal. In connection with the theory of knowledge he reveals the fact that Avicenna had been influenced by Stoic thought; and in spite of the outspoken condemnation of that conception by his predecessor, he maintains that knowledge is “the union of the intelligible with the intelligent”.

From problems of metaphysics he turns to questions of psychology, and distinguishes four kinds of perception. They are: (1) sensual perception, (2) imaginative, (3) estimative, and (4) intellectual perception. These are faculties of the simple intellect, the significance of which, he believes, Avicenna failed to realize, because he would not concede that knowledge is the union of the intelligible with the intelligent. As regards the nature of God’s knowledge of the universe, he believes that this takes place because once a knowledge of the cause is attained, then the knowledge of the effects or caused things follows without any difficulty. But there are the varieties of intellect to consider; and here he throws much light on the sources from which the Islamic philosophers obtained their ideas on the subject, and particularly on the disputed fourfold division of the intellect referred to in connection with the treatise of Kindi in the introduction to his book. Besides the writings of Farabi and Avicenna, Mulla Sadra makes mention 01 the Theology attributed to Aristotle, then speaks of a treatise On the Intelligence and the Intelligible by Porphyry; and then adds that he has in his possession a book on the intellect by Alexander of Aphrodisias, whom Avicenna was in the habit of calling the accomplished among the early ones, and according to which Aristotle had divided the intellect into three varieties which he goes on to explain. Hence the division of Alexander, like that of Aristotle, was threefold and not fourfold as some have understood from his writings. Space does not allow further remarks on the Asfar al-Arbaa (The Four Books) the reading of which for a student of the history of Islamic thought and its relation with the Greek sources is highly rewarding. It is full of valuable references, including some to Plotinus whom he calls the Greek Shaikh.

It was probably under Avicennian influence that Mulla Sadra refused to believe in the resurrection of the body after death. His metaphysical ideas found their way into the writings of the semi-orthodox religious school of Shaikhis, though Shaikh Ahmad Ahsai, the founder of that movement, sharply criticized some of the points in his commentaries.

Mulla. Muhsin Faid (d. 1680), who had been the favorite pupil of his master, whose daughter he married, was considered the most faithful commentator of Mulla Sadra, yet he had very little to contribute, and is hardly read nowadays. Mulla Hadi Sabzewari (d. 1878), on the other hand, is sometimes called the greatest philosopher of the nineteenth century in Persia. The son of a religious divine, he studied at Mashhad and Isfahan, and returned to lecture in his native Sabzewar. He wrote some seventeen books, of which the best known isAsrar al-Hikam (Secrets of Philosophy). In the traditional manner he has treatises on logic and metaphysics in verse. But he was essentially a commentator and often used some of the writings of Mulla Sadra as text. It is interesting to note that he also categorically denied bodily resurrection and a material hereafter.

Finally, some mention might be made of the fact that innumerable anecdotes and legends gathered in the course of time around the name of Avicenna, and have since survived in the form of folklore. These represent him as a boon companion ready to drown all worries in a cup of wine; a resourceful spirit, good to invoke in a desperate situation; a man of hidden powers able to appear in the guise of a sorcerer and inflict endless harm; a physician who can cure an illness and extract many a hidden secret by auto-suggestion; an accursed atheist who can undermine men’s faith in the most subtle and unsuspected manner; and an abiding mystic who ridicules life and all that it has to otter. It was clearly his philosophy and the circumstances of his life that gave rise to such notions of him. Many tales have been collected from the countryside by a scholar in Russian Tajikistan who claims to come from the region where Avicenna was born. Thus centuries after his death he remains to fill some with horror, and to guide others to those distant regions of thought so deeply congenial to the Persians.

Surah al-Zumar, Verses 56 - 75

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 56

أَنْ تَقُولَ نَفْسٌ يَا حَسْرَتَی عَلَی مَا فَرَّطْتُ فِي جَنْبِ اللَّهِ وَإِنْ كُنْتُ لَمِنَ السَّاخِرِينَ

56. Lest a person should say “Alas, my grief that I was undutiful to Allah and I was indeed among those who mocked [His Verses].”

The Day of Resurrection is the Day of Regret. Underrating Divine Injunctions, and worse than that, mocking them all spring from neglect.

Following the emphatic injunction as to repentance and compensation for the past wrong deeds, the blessed Verse in question is saying that these injunctions have been sent down lest on the Day of Resurrection one may say:

“Woe to me that I failed to act upon Divine Command and I mocked His Verses and Messengers.”

The word hasra is employed in the sense of sorrow and grief caused by past regrettable acts. In his Mufradat, Raghib says that the word derives from hasr indicating pull way or remove garment but it figuratively connotes regret about and grieve for the past acts as if the veils of ignorance have been removed.

When man is raised on the Day of Resurrection and perceives the consequences of his transgressions of bounds, neglects, sins, underrating serious affairs, will cry out “Woe to me!” A dire sense of grief and regret wraps up his heart and expresses himself with such interjections.

Exegets differ as to the meaning of

janb Allah (“beside Allah”)

and present many a suggestion.

The word is literally employed in the sense of side and it applies to anything located at the side of something else, in the same manner that yamin and yasar signify right and left sides of the body respectively, but owing to generalization, they imply anything located at the left and right sides.

The phrase:

“beside Allah”

also ad hoc designate all the affairs beside Him, e.g. His Command, Obedience to Him, Closeness to Him, The Divine Books sent down by Him.

Thus, the sinful regret about and grieve for their undutifulness against Allah and particularly lay emphasis on mocking Qur’anic Verses and Divinely appointed Messengers, since their wrong acts mainly stem from their neglect and derision which in turn spring from ignorance, vanity, and bias.1

Surah al-Zumar - Verses 57 - 58

أَوْ تَقُولَ لَوْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ هَدَانِي لَكُنْتُ مِنَ الْمُتَّقِينَ

أَوْ تَقُولَ حِينَ تَرَی الْعَذَابَ لَوْ أَنَّ لِي كَرَّةً فَأَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ

57. Or [lest] he should say [out of profound grief]: “If only Allah has guided me, I should indeed have been among the righteous.”

58. Or [lest] he should say when he sees the torment: “If only I had another chance [to return to the world] then I should be among the good doers.”

On the Resurrection Day, sinners aim to acquit themselves of their sins. On the Day of Resurrection the sinful wish that they could return to the world in order to do good [to himself and others].

The blessed Verse in question says:

“Lest that the sinful say: ‘Had God guided me, I would have been among the righteous.’”

Such words are apparently uttered upon reckoning, noticing that some people proceed toward Paradise enjoying all Bounties for their righteous good deeds. He also wishes that he could accompany them to Paradise.

Verse 60 is saying that upon experiencing Divine Chastisement, he wishes that he could return to the world to become one of the righteous. Upon treading the way to Hell, he notices the blazing fire and the excruciating torment, he sighs wishing that he could be permitted to return to the world and compensate for his sins through committing righteous deeds and become one of the good doers.

Thus, each of the three words are uttered at certain times: noticing the Resurrection he regrets his past deeds; perceiving the rewards of the righteous, he wishes that the same were in store for him; experiencing Divine Chastisement, he wishes that he could return to the world and compensate for his past deeds.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 59

بَلَی قَدْ جَاءَتْكَ آيَاتِي فَكَذَّبْتَ بِهَا وَاسْتَكْبَرْتَ وَكُنْتَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ

59. Yes! Indeed, there came unto you My Verses but you denied them and were vain and were among disbelievers.

The sinful express some words on the Day of Resurrection:

1. Confessing to neglect

2. Confessing to derision

3. Wishing for guidance

4. Wishing for returning to the world.

God Almighty accepts his confessions but concerning the third word, the blessed Verse in question says that God Almighty provided you with Guidance but he denied it.

An answer provided for the fourth word is to be found elsewhere:

“Even if they are returned [to the world] they shall still be wrong doers.”

A reply is provided for the second word as per which Divine Verses came unto him; however, he denied them and was vain and one of the disbelievers. He is saying that had Divine Guidance came unto him, he would have been one of the righteous.

What is Divine Guidance but some many Divine Books, God’s Messengers, Divine Verses and Signs of Truth in horizons and souls? He saw and heard them all but what was his reaction toward them but denial, vanity, and disbelief?

Would it be possible that God Almighty chastises anyone without warning them? Was he different from the guided in terms of Divine Guidance? Therefore, he is to blame for his evil deeds. Vanity and denial of Divine Verses and Signs are the main reasons that lead to disbelief and faithlessness.

No answer is suggested for the first word, since it is an inevitable reality - they have to regret and grieve for their past vicious deeds. Regarding the third word, i.e., request for being returned to the world, numerous answers are provided, e.g.:

“if they were returned [to the world], they would certainly revert to that which they were forbidden. And indeed they are liars”2 .3

Furthermore, the reply suggested for the second word may make a reference to the reply provided for this question as well - what is the goal of returning to the world? Is it anything other than being warned against vicious deeds?

It is worthy of note that God Almighty had already warned them and such further warnings would be futile. Experiencing torment in the Hereafter is their sudden awakening which will be rendered futile upon their return to the world.

In the same vein, the Holy Qur’an makes mention of polytheists entangled in the agitated sea invoking God with sincere devotion but upon stepping on the shore they consign everything to oblivion:

(“And when they embark on a ship, they invoke Allah, making their faith pure for Him only: but when He brings them safely to land, behold, they give a share of their worship to others,”4 ).

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 60

وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ تَرَی الَّذِينَ كَذَبُوا عَلَی اللَّهِ وُجُوهُهُمْ مُسْوَدَّةٌ أَلَيْسَ فِي جَهَنَّمَ مَثْویً لِلْمُتَكَبِّرِينَ

60. And on the Day of Resurrection you will see those who lied against Allah - their faces will be black. Is there not in Hell an abode for the vain?

Lying against Allah are of diverse kinds:

1. Associating other objects of worship with Him

2. Likening God Almighty to something

3. Regarding angels as God’s offspring

4. Attributing one’s vicious act to God Almighty

5. Pretending to be God or Divinely appointed Messenger

6. Making distortions and innovations in Divine Commands.

It is narrated in traditions that forging traditions and narrating them from the Infallible Imams (as) are on a par with lying against God Almighty, since the Infallible Imams narrate from the Noble Prophet (S) and the Prophet (S) imparts Divine Word.5

Pursuant to the words of the lying polytheists and the arrogant on the Day of Resurrection regretting about their past vicious deeds and their request as to being returned to the world to compensate for their past deeds which is a futile and unacceptable request, the blessed Verses in question treat of the same question saying:

“And on the Day of Resurrection you will see those who lied against Allah - their faces will be black.”

Although the meaning of

“lied against Allah”

is broad in its semantic range, but it is ad hoc applied to associating partners with God and claiming that angels, Jesus Christ (as), and the like are His offspring.

The word mustakbir indicates arrogant, but it is herein employed to refer to those who waxed arrogance against Divinely appointed messengers calling people to the Religion of Truth and their denial of them. The liars’ blackened face on the Day of Resurrection reveals their disgrace and humility.

It is well known that secrets will be manifest and man’s thought and deeds will be embodied on the Day of Resurrection. Those who have black hearts and their deeds were dark like their thought will be seen with dark and blackened faces on that Day.

In other words, what is concealed shall be manifest and faces shall reflect hearts as a consequence of which those with black hearts shall appear with blackened faces and those whose hearts are illuminating shall appear with bright faces on that Day.

It is mentioned elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an6 :

“On the Day [of Resurrection] when some faces will become white and some faces will become black; as for those whose faces will become black [unto them will be said]: ‘Did you reject faith after accepting it? Then taste the torment [in Hell] for rejecting faith.’ And for those whose faces will become white, they will be in Allah’s Mercy, therein they shall dwell forever.”

According to a number of traditions narrated from the Shi’i Imams (as), lying against Allah will lead to blackness of face on the Day of Resurrection is broader in its semantic range as per which it includes false claims to the leadership of the Muslim community (umma).

In the same vein, in his I’tiqadat, Shaykh Saduq narrates from Imam Sadiq that upon being asked as to the interpretation of the blessed Verse in question, he replied:

“It refers to one who pretends to be the Imam.”

He was asked regarding such person whether he happens to be a descendant of ‘Ali and Fatima (as), to which he replied:

“Even if he happens to be of such descent.”7

It clearly bears testimony to the fact that false claim to Divine leadership and Imamate is an instance of lying against God. In the same vein, those who lie against the Noble Prophet (S) and the Infallible Imams will be on a par with those who lie against Allah.

Thus, it is reported in another tradition narrated from Imam Sadiq (as):

“Whoever transmits a tradition from us, we will ask him some day regarding its truth.

If he happens to be in the right and he is one of us, he has attributed a true word to God Almighty and His Messenger (S), but if he lied against us, he has lied against God and His Messenger (S), since when we report a tradition, we do not say such and such a person reported thus, but we say God or His Messenger (S) said it.

Then he recited the Verse:

‘And on the Day of Resurrection you will see those who lied against Allah - their faces will be black.’”8

The tradition clearly bears testimony to the fact that the Shi’i Imams (as) transmitted nothing of their own, but all the sound traditions narrated on their authorities trace back to Prophetic traditions.

The fact in question is worthy of note for all Muslim scholars; therefore those who do not acknowledge their Imamate are supposed to acknowledge the veracity of their transmissions as Prophetic traditions.

In the same vein, another tradition is narrated from Imam Sadiq (as) in Kafi as per which:

“The tradition narrated by each of the Imams is another tradition and our tradition is that of the Messenger of God (S).”9

It is worthy of note that Qur’anic Verses clearly refer to the fact that disbelief mainly stems from vanity, as the Qur’anic Verse10 says:

“He refused and was arrogant and was one of the disbelievers.”

Thus, the arrogant may not dwell nowhere but in Hell.

According to a Prophetic tradition:

“There is an abode in Hell for the arrogant called Saqar which once complained to God Almighty about the unbearable heat and requested Him to take a breath. Upon obtaining the Permission, it took a breath and set Hell ablaze.11

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 61

وَيُنَجِّي اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ اتَّقَوْا بِمَفَازَتِهِمْ لا يَمَسُّهُمُ السُّوءُ وَلا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ

61. And Allah will deliver those who are the righteous with their success, untouched by evil in the least, nor shall they grieve.

Fear of God leads to deliverance and the God fearing entertain no grief.

The blessed Verse in question treats of the righteous and their happiness on the Day of Resurrection as opposed to the arrogant and the vain, saying:

“Allah will deliver those who are the righteous with their success.”

Their deliverance and success are explicated with two terse clauses:

“[They are] untouched by evil in the least, nor shall they grieve.”

They live in a world devoid of anything but good, purity, and happiness. The brief expression actually encompasses all Divine Bounties.

Surah al-Zumar - Verses 62 - 63

اللَّهُ خَالِقُ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ وَهُوَ عَلَی كُلِّ شَيْءٍ وَكِيلٌ

لَهُ مَقَالِيدُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِآياتِ اللَّهِ أُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْخَاسِرُونَ

62. Allah is the Creator of all things and He is the Guardian, Preserver, and Controller of all things.

63. To Him belongs the keys of the heavens and the earth. And those who disbelieve in Divine Signs and Verses, such are they who will be the losers.

The real monotheist believes in all dimensions of Divine Unity: Unity in Creatorship, Unity in Lordship, and Unity in worship.

The following Verse says:

“Do you order me to worship other than Allah?”

In other words, all existent beings need Him in creation and survival.

“Allah is the Creator of all things and He is the Guardian, Preserver, and Controller of all things.”

The first and the second clauses refer to Unity in Creatorship and Unity in Lordship respectively.

It is noteworthy that even most of the polytheists admitted Unity of Creatorship, as it is reflected in Verse 38 of the Chapter in question:

“If you ask them [i.e., disbelievers]” ‘Who created the heavens and the earth?’ Surely they will say: ‘Allah.’”

However, they had gone astray concerning Unity of Lordship, since they regarded idols as their guardians, preservers and disposers of their affairs and sought refuge in them in hardships.

The Holy Qur’an actually makes a reference to such belief saying that disposing the affairs of the world as well as its preservation and protection are at the hand of its Creator, as a consequence of which, people are supposed to seek refuge in Him at all times.

In his Lisan al-’Arab, Ibn Mansur makes mention of different senses for the word wakil, e.g. guardian, preserver, and disposer of affairs. Thus, it becomes evident that idols lead to neither gain, nor loss. They neither solve problems, nor do they make problems. They are weak and useless objects incapable of doing anything.

The clause:

“Allah is the Creator of all things”

is employed by some adherents of the school of predestination as an argument for their false belief, saying that their acts are referred to in the Verse in question, hence, Allah is the Creator of such acts, even if people physically carry out such acts.

Their gross mistake stems from their inability to comprehend that Divine Lordship as to man’s acts has nothing to do with his free will, since Divine Will and human will are not parallel but rather interrelated lengthwise; in other words, man’s acts are related to God and to himself.

On the one hand, all things in the world of existence are encompassed by Divine Omnipotence hence his acts are created by Him, since He provides man with power, intellect, free will, and the required means to act. Consequently, man’s acts may be ascribed to Him.

He wills that man enjoys free will to act. He provides man will the means required for acting upon his will. Yet, man is free to choose his acts, as a consequence of which such acts are ascribed to him and he is responsible against them.

One who claims that man is the creator of his own acts and God has nothing to do with them is a polytheist, since he believes in two creators, the Great Creator and the small creator.

If one claims that God is the Creator of his acts and he has nothing to do with it, he has gone astray since he has denied Divine Wisdom and Justice.

Would it be possible that man be responsible for His Acts? If so, responsibility, obligation, the Hereafter, reckoning, chastisement and reward would be meaningless.

Therefore, the standard Muslim dogmas based on Qur’anic Verses demonstrate that all human acts are ascribed both to Him and man and such ascription is not inconsistent in the least, since the relation between the two is not parallel but lengthwise.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 64 - 65

قُلْ أَفَغَيْرَ اللَّهِ تَأْمُرُونِّي أَعْبُدُ أَيُّهَا الْجَاهِلُونَ

وَلَقَدْ أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ وَإِلَی الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ لَئِنْ أَشْرَكْتَ لَيَحْبَطَنَّ عَمَلُكَ وَلَتَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ

64. Say: “Do you order me to worship other than Allah? O you fools!”

65. And indeed it has been revealed to you as it was to those [Messengers] before you: “If you join others in worship with Allah, surely your deeds will be in vain and you will certainly be among the losers.

The Verses in question are mainly addressed to the Noble Prophet (S) but all people are also involved in such affairs; yet, God Almighty addresses the Prophet (S) owing to the significance of the issue indicating that even if the Prophet (S) disbelieves for a single moment, his deeds will be in vain and he will be among the losers.

Thus, Verse 65 draws a neat distinction between belief and disbelief, saying:

“indeed it has been revealed to you as it was to those [Messengers] before you: ‘If you join others in worship with Allah, surely your deeds will be in vain and you will certainly be among the losers.’”

Therefore, disbelief leads to two consequences which may affect Divinely appointed Messenger in case of their disbelief: vanity of deeds and being a loser in one’s life. The former refers to futility of righteous good deeds owing to disbelief since such acts will solely be acknowledged if one believes in Divine Unity.

Disbelief is likened to a blazing fire burning the tree of human deeds, a lightening setting ablaze all the crops of his life, a tempest rendering human deeds futile, as mentioned elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an12 :

“The parable of those who disbelieved in their Lord is that their works are as ashes, on which the wind blows furiously on a stormy day; they shall not be able to get aught of what they have earned. That is the straying, far away.”

According to a prophetic tradition:

“God Almighty reckons the deeds of all servants unless they disbelieve; surely they shall be sent to Fire without reckoning.”13

Disbelievers will be among losers since they lose their most valuable possessions, i.e., intellect and life, in this spacious market of mundane world and fail to purchase anything except for regret and grief.

A question arises here: Would it be possible that Divinely appointed eminent prophets turn to disbelief as a consequence of which the Verse in question treats them in such harsh tone?

The answer to this question is crystal clear: they shall never turn to disbelief even if they enjoy the free will to do so and infallibility is not on a par with the loss of free will.

It is to be noted that their excellence of knowledge and their immediate and constant nexus with the Origin of Divine Revelation hinders them to entertain disbelief for one single moment. Would it be imaginable that an intelligent physician aware of the effects of a fatal poisonous substance entertains the thought of its consumption?

The Verse aims to warn people of the great risk of entertaining disbelief so as to inform them that God Almighty warns His Messengers about disbelief. It reminds one of the Arabic proverb:

“I mean you, but O neighbor! Listen to it!”

According to a tradition narrated from Imam ‘Ali ibn Musa al-Rida, inquired by Ma’mun concerning the Verses in question, he said:

“Such Verses refer to the Muslim community, even if the Messenger of God (S) is addressed herein.”14

Surah al-Zumar - Verses 66 - 67

بَلِ اللَّهَ فَاعْبُدْ وَكُنْ مِنَ الشَّاكِرِينَ

وَمَا قَدَرُوا اللَّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِ وَالْأَرْضُ جَمِيعاً قَبْضَتُهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَالسَّمَاوَاتُ مَطْوِيَّاتٌ بِيَمِينِهِ سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَی عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ

66. Nay! But worship Allah alone and be among the grateful.

67. They did not appreciate Allah as such as is due to Him, though on the Day of Resurrection the whole of the earth shall be subject to His Omnipotence and the heavens will be rolled up in His Hand. Glorified is He and Exalted is He above all that they associate as partners with Him.

Monotheism is the best manner of deliverance from loss and harm; likewise one may show his gratitude toward God Almighty is to worship Him.

Thus the blessed Verse lays further emphasis:

“Nay! But worship Allah alone and be among the grateful.”

Precedence of Allah is for specification (hasr), i.e., you are solely supposed to worship the Pure Essence of Allah. What follows is the Divine Injunction to gratitude since showing gratitude for Divine Bounties bestowed upon man may serve as a means of knowing God and rejection of any kind of polytheism and disbelief.

Gratitude for Divine Bounties is in human primordial natural disposition, but it is supposed to follow the provider of bounties. Consequently, it leads to the acknowledgement of Divine Unity and thus idols which provide man with no bounty are abandoned.

Verse 67 treats of another exposition for rejection of polytheism and disbelief regarding it mainly to stem from not knowing God deservingly as a consequence of which his Sacred Name was relegated to those of idols:

(“They did not appreciate Allah as such as is due to Him”).

Polytheism and disbelief mainly spring from lack of appreciating God Almighty as such.

One who knows that His Existence is Boundless, He is the Creator of all creatures and they are at all times in need of His Source of Emanation and Divine Bounty, He is the Dispenser of the world of existence and He is the One Who solves all problems, He is the Provider of all existent beings and intercession depends on His Permission and Command, may not turn to another being.

It is worthy of note that duality is not applicable to God Almighty since two boundless beings are not reasonably possible.

To express Divine Omnipotence and Glory, the Verse in question employs a figurative expression saying:

“on the Day of Resurrection the whole of the earth shall be subject to His Omnipotence.”

The word qabda is applied to what is grasped by hand and it is usually used figuratively in the sense of absolute power and sway in the same manner that it is said in daily speech that such and such city or such and such property are in hand of so and so.

The word matwwiyat is taken from tayy which literally denotes “to be enclosed” and at times it connotes “transience of life” or “passing by something.”

The aforesaid expression is more clearly attested elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an15 :

“The Day when We shall roll up the heavens like a scroll rolled up for books.”

It is to be noted that one who has rolled up a scroll holding it in his hand wields perfect sway over it.

The choice of the word:

yamin (“right hand”)

is due to the fact that right hand is usually used by most of the people for carrying out tasks of significance since they feel that it is stronger than the left one.

In short, all these similes and expressions connote absolute sway of the Creator over the world of existence in this world and the Hereafter so that all men comprehend that in the Hereafter, the key to deliverance and the solution of problems is in the Hand of God Almighty lest they turn to idols and other objects of worship for intercession and any other support.

Are not the earth and the heavens under His Sway? Why do they make mention of the Hereafter? The reply to these questions is that on that Day, Divine Omnipotence shall be more manifest than any other time as It shall be evident to such extent that all men shall clearly perceive that all things belong to Him and they are under His Sway.

Furthermore, on the Day of Resurrection, some men may turn to others besides God Almighty for deliverance, in the same manner that Christians raise the question of deliverance for worshipping Jesus Christ (as). It is in this vein that the Verse treats of Divine Omnipotence on the Day of Resurrection.

The above clearly bears testimony to the fact that all these expressions are figurative and it is because of the brevity of words in our daily life that we have to express such exalted meanings with such small words.

Only very simple and narrow minded people may entertain Divine anthropomorphism in their minds. Since words fail to convey Divine Glory, one has to make use of such words in their figurative meanings with their broader semantic range.

It is noteworthy that a clear but terse conclusion closes the Verse:

“Glorified is He and Exalted is He above all that they associate as partners with Him.”

Had man not pass judgments with his limited thought concerning His Glorified and Pure Essence, he would have never turned toward polytheism and idolatry.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 68

وَنُفِخَ فِي الصُّورِ فَصَعِقَ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَنْ فِي الْأَرْضِ إِلَّا مَنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ ثُمَّ نُفِخَ فِيهِ أُخْرَی فَإِذَا هُمْ قِيَامٌ يَنْظُرُونَ

68. And the Trumpet Shall be blown and all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth shall swoon away [and die], except him whom Allah wills. Then it shall be blown a second time and they shall suddenly rise up, looking [around].

All men die upon the blowing of the Trumpet; thus, the exception attested in the clause:

“except him whom Allah wills”

makes a reference to Divine Omnipotence. In other words, God Almighty wields absolute sway over the world of existence and when all die, He keeps alive those whom He wills. According to a number of traditions, [Archangels] Jibra’il, Israfil, and Mika’il, and also martyrs are mentioned among those who shall stay alive.16

The preceding Verses treated of the Day of Resurrection and blessed Verse in question pursues the same question and makes mention of many a characteristic thereof.

It opens with the end of the world, saying:

“And the Trumpet Shall be blown and all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth shall swoon away [and die], except him whom Allah wills.”

The Verse proceeds with saying:

“Then it shall be blown a second time and they shall suddenly rise up, looking [around].”

The Verse clearly indicates that a sudden happening shall occur at the end of the world and the beginning of Resurrection. All animate beings immediately die at the end of the world and following an interlude, all human beings shall be suddenly raised and await Reckoning upon Resurrection.

The Holy Qur’an expresses these two incidents as:

“blowing of the Trumpet”

serving as an elegant metaphorical expression connoting sudden and simultaneous incidents, since nafkh denotes “blowing” and sur is employed in the sense of trumpet or a hollow horn usually used for setting caravan and or army to get underway or march or making them stop.

It is worthy of note that the two differed in tunes. The expression also connotes the ease of carrying out the task indicating that God Almighty raises all with one single Command likened to blowing of the trumpet used for getting the caravan underway.

It has been repeatedly mentioned above that our words are invented for our limited daily life hence they fail to precisely convey the truths of the metaphysical world upon the end of this world and the beginning of the other world as a consequence of which we have to attend to the existing evidence and use ordinary words in a broader semantic range.

It is worthy of note that diverse expressions are attested in the Holy Qur’an as to the end of this world and the beginning of the world to come.

In this vein, different Verses (more than ten Verses) treat of:

“blowing of the Trumpet.”

In one instance17 mention is made of nuqira fi al-naqur which bears the sense of blowing the trumpet and the like:

(“Then when the Trumpet is sounded. Verily, that Day shall be a Hard Day”).

The expression:

qari’a (“rigorous striking”)

is also attested in 101:1-3.

The same theme is also expressed by the word:

sayha (“harsh shout”)

as in 36:49:

“They await only but a single shout which will seize them while they are disputing,”

which treats of the shout heard at the end of the world which takes men unawares.

Verse 53 of Chapter 36 treats of the shout heard on the Day of Resurrection upon hearing which all men shall raise and they shall be brought before the Just Lord:

“It will be but a single shout, so they shall all be brought up before Us.”

The aforesaid Verses indicate that a very harsh shout shall make all the beings of the heavens and the earth die and it shall be the:

“shout of death.”

They shall all come back to life by a very harsh shout by the time of Resurrection and it shall be the:

“shout of life.”

What is precisely the manner of the twain shouts? In what manner do they impress the beings?

Nobody save God Almighty knows the answer to this question. Treating of the Trumpet to be blown by Israfil at the end the world, a number of traditions indicate that all the beings of the heavens die upon blowing the Trumpet and God Almighty issues the Command of his death bidding him to die and he shall die.18

The majority of Qur’anic exegets interpret nafkh fi al-sur as

“blowing the Trumpet,”

as mentioned above. These are delicate expressions concerning the manner of the end of the world and the beginning of Resurrection. The question raised at the close of the Verse concerns the number of blowing the Trumpet.

The majority of exegets maintain that it is blown twice and the blessed Verse in question apparently makes a reference to the same.

Taking into account other Qur’anic instances regarding the same indicates the same, such that the first blowing is termed:

fright (“faza’”);

(“And the Day on which the Trumpet will be blown and all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth will be terrified,”19 )

and the second one:

“death and life,”

referred to in Qur’anic Verses some of which were mentioned above, the former and the latter are termed:

“swooning and dying” (sa’q)

and

“rising up” (qiyam).

It is true that there shall not be more than the twain.

Another Qur’anic evidence may be produced for the matter at hand, namely:

“On the Day the earth and the mountains will shake violently.”

The second earthquake shall occur raising servants as peers.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 69

وَأَشْرَقَتِ الْأَرْضُ بِنُورِ رَبِّهَا وَوُضِعَ الْكِتَابُ وَجِيءَ بِالنَّبِيِّينَ وَالشُّهَدَاءِ وَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْحَقِّ وَهُمْ لا يُظْلَمُونَ

69. [On that Day] the earth will shine with the Light of its Lord and the Book of deeds will be placed [forward] and the Prophets and the witnesses will be brought forward and it will be judged between them with truth and they will not be wronged.

The phrase:

“with the Light of its Lord” (bi-nur-i rabbih)

denotes either the Light of Truth and Justice with which God Almighty illuminates the earth on that Day or a Light other than the one shed by sun and moon to be Divinely created on that Day.

The exegetic work Atyab al-Bayan reads:

“Since the light of sun and moon is not apparent,

“the Light of its Lord”

indicates the Light shed by believers,”

then this Verse in cited as evidence thereof:

“On the Day you shall see the believing men and women, their light illuminating before them and by their right hands”20 .

The blessed Verse in question resumes the discussion concerning Resurrection, saying:

“[On that Day] the earth will shine with the Light of its Lord.”

Different interpretations have been suggested as to the “shining” with Divine Light, the most significant of which are the following:

1. Some exegets maintain that Divine Light indicates Truth and Justice with which God Almighty illuminates the face of the earth.

In his Bihar al-Anwar ‘Allama Majlisi says:

“That is, the earth shall be illuminated with Divine Justice on the Day of Resurrection, since Justice is the Light of the earth.”21

Some other exegets maintain that the Prophetic tradition:

“Wrong doing manifests itself as darkness and shadows on the Day of Resurrection”

substantiating the suggestion in question.22

In his Kashshaf, Zamakhshari suggests the same meaning, saying:

“On that Day, the earth shall be illuminated by the administration of justice and fair arbitration of records of righteous and vicious deeds.”

2. Some other exegets hold that it is a reference to a Light other than that of sun and moon which shall be created by God Almighty particularly for that Day.

3. The eminent author of [the exegetic work] Tafsir al-Mizan [‘Allama Tabataba’i] says:

“Illumination of the earth by Divine Light is regarded as one of the characteristics of the Day of Resurrection which is uncovering veils and manifestation of the truth behind things and human deeds including good, evil, obedience, disobedience, truth, and falsehood,”

following which Verse 22 of Chapter 50 is quoted to substantiate the suggested meaning:

“You neglected it, then we unveiled the cover from you and your eyes see it clearly today!”

It is true that Divine Light on that Day encompasses all things, but the emphasis laid on the earth refers to the fact that it makes a reference to the state of people on earth on that Day.

It is to be noted that the aforementioned interpretations are not inconsistent; however the first and the third interpretations sound more appropriate.

The blessed Verse in question indubitably refers to Resurrection and interpreting it in a number of traditions narrated from the Noble Prophet’s (S) Household (as) [Ahl al-Bayt] to Imam Mahdi’s (as) Rise at the end of the world is in fact a kind of comparison and likening, emphasizing that upon his Rise, incidents resembling Resurrection shall occur and he will administer justice as per the nature of the world as the rightful Imam (as), the Successor to the Noble Prophet of Islam (S), and the Vicegerent of God Almighty on the earth.

Mufaddal ibn ‘Umar narrates from Imam Sadiq (as):

“Upon the Rise of our Riser, the earth shall be illuminated by Divine Light and Lord’s servants shall not be in need of sun shine and darkness shall wither away.”

The second clause of the blessed Verse in question treats of the record of deeds, saying that on that Day, the record of deeds shall be put forward and man’s deeds shall be reckoned;

(“And the Book [of deeds] shall be put forward”).

Such records embrace all the significant and non-significant deeds and according to the Holy Qur’an23 :

“What sort of Book is this that leaves neither a small sin nor a grave sin, but has recorded it with numbers!”

The following clause of the blessed Verse in question treating of witnesses further adds:

“the Prophets and the witnesses will be brought forward.”

Prophets shall be summoned to talk to sinners concerning the fulfillment of their Prophetic Missions:

(“We shall definitely inquire the Messengers,”24 ).

Witnesses shall be called to the Just Tribunal to bear witness. It is true that God is Omniscient, but the testimony of witnesses shall be required for laying emphasis on Divine Justice. Who are these witnesses?

Qur’anic exegets are not unanimous on the issue. Some regard the good, the pure, and the just among communities who bear witness to Prophetic Missions and some regard the deeds of the people contemporaneous with Prophets.

The Infallible Imams (as) are regarded as the forerunners of the witnesses.

Substantiating their arguments by the Qur’anic Verse:25

“And every person will come forth along with his companion to drive him to Divine Tribunal and a witness accompanies him,”

some other exegets interpret witnesses as angels bearing testimony to man’s deeds. Yet, there are exegets who interpret the word alluding to bodily members, space, and time of obedience and disobedience as witnesses on the Day of Resurrection.

However, the word

“witnesses”

is apparently employed in its broad semantic range and each of the exegets refer to one of the aspects thereof.

The fourth clause says:

“It will be judged between them with truth.”

The fifth clause further adds:

“They will not be wronged.”

It is evident that when God Almighty wields sway, the earth is illuminated by the Light of His Justice, the record precisely reflecting man’s deeds is put forward, and the Prophets and just witnesses make their presence, the Judgment shall be based on Truth and Justice and wrong doing may not find its way there.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 70

وَوُفِّيَتْ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ مَا عَمِلَتْ وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يَفْعَلُونَ

70. And each person shall be paid in full of what he did and He is Best Aware of what they do.

Divine Chastisement and Reward shall be paid in full.

The sixth clause that completes the foregoing discussion is to be found in the blessed Verse in question:

“Each person shall be paid in full of what he did.”

It is neither the Chastisement nor the Reward of the deeds which shall be given to man but the deeds themselves.

It shall be the best Chastisement and the best Reward that they shall be paid in full and they shall accompany man at all times. Who is able to administer justice so precisely but One Whose Knowledge encompasses everything.

Thus, the seventh and the last clause says:

“He is Best Aware of what they do.”

There is even no need for witnesses, since His Omniscience far exceeds all witnesses. Yet, Divine Favor and Justice require the presence of witnesses. This is the Day of Resurrection for which we have to prepare ourselves.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 71 - 72

وَسِيقَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا إِلَی جَهَنَّمَ زُمَراً حَتَّى إِذَا جَاءُوهَا فُتِحَتْ أَبْوَابُهَا وَقَالَ لَهُمْ خَزَنَتُهَا أَلَمْ يَأْتِكُمْ رُسُلٌ مِنْكُمْ يَتْلُونَ عَلَيْكُمْ آيَاتِ رَبِّكُمْ وَيُنْذِرُونَكُمْ لِقَاءَ يَوْمِكُمْ هَذَا قَالُوا بَلَی وَلَكِنْ حَقَّتْ كَلِمَةُ الْعَذَابِ عَلَی الْكَافِرِينَ

قِيلَ ادْخُلُوا أَبْوَابَ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا فَبِئْسَ مَثْوَی الْمُتَكَبِّرِينَ

71. And those who disbelieved will be driven to Hell in groups till when they reach it the gates thereof will be opened and its keepers shall say: “Did not the Messengers come unto you from yourselves reciting to you the Verses of your Lord warning you of the Meeting of this Day?” They will say: “Yes, [the Messengers came unto us and recited Divine Verses unto us],” but the Command of Divine torment has been justified against disbelievers.

72. It will be said [unto them]: “Enter the gates of Hell to abide therein and what an evil abode of the arrogant.”

Driving sinners toward Hell is a humiliation different from other Chastisements. The blessed Verses in question resume the discussions on Resurrection providing details concerning what was already said concisely in the foregoing Verses regarding the Rewards and Chastisements of believers and unbelievers.

Verse 71 opens with the people of the Hell, saying:

“Those who disbelieved will be driven to Hell in groups.”

Who will drive them to Hell? The answer is that the angels responsible for inflicting torments will drive them to the gates of Hell.

A similar expression is to be found elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an26 :

“And every person will come forth along with his companion to drive him to Divine Tribunal and a witness accompanies him.”

The word:

zumar (“small group”)

indicates that they will be driven in small and scattered groups toward Hell. The word siqa is taken from s-w-q (“to drive”).

The blessed Verse 71 further adds that they proceed toward Hell till they reach it. Then, the gates of Hell will be opened and the guardians of Hell will reproach them thus:

“Did not the Messengers come unto you from yourselves reciting to you the Verses of your Lord warning you of the Meeting of this Day?”

The expression clearly reveals that prior to their arrival, the gates of Hell are shut in the same manner that the gates of prisons are closed but upon the arrival of new comers, they open to them all of a sudden and the sudden opening of the gates inspires more fear and awe in their hearts.

Prior to anything else, the people of Hell bombard them with reproaches saying that all the means of guidance was prepared for you. Messengers from among yourselves used to recite to you Divine Verses and constantly warned you to follow the Straight Path.

What did happen that such misfortune befell you? Such words uttered by guardians of Hell will be among the most excruciating pains by which they will be welcomed upon their entering Hell.

Their reply is a painful brief sentence:

“Yes, the Messengers came unto us and recited Divine Verses unto us and warned us of our disbelief.”

Consequently, the Command of Divine torment will be justified against disbelievers.

Some Qur’anic exegets regard the phrase:

“the Command of Divine torment” (kalimat al-’adhab)

an allusion to Divine Word upon Adams Fall onto the earth or upon Satan’s decision as to deceiving the Children of Adam, as reflected elsewhere in the Qur’an27 :

“But those who disbelieve and belie Our Ayat (“Signs, Verses”), they are the dwellers of the Fire. They shall abide therein forever. When Satan said unto God Almighty that he would deceive all but His sincerely devout servants, He replied: “I will fill Hell with jinn and mankind28 .”

Thus, they confess that they disbelieved the Prophets and Divine Verses and naturally a better fate may not be in store for them.

It is also possible that:

“the Command of Divine torment has been justified against disbelievers”

indicates that at times, owing to committing many a sin and bearing animosity, grudge, and prejudice against Truth, man’s heart is sealed and he may not return in which case the Command of Divine torment will be justified against him.

It is to be noted that such misfortune stems from man’s deeds and there is no room for predestination and lack of human free will.

The brief dialogue at the gates of Hell comes to its end by saying unto them:

“Enter the gates of Hell to abide therein and what an evil abode of the arrogant.”

As mentioned above,

“the gates of Hell”

may refer to those set in conformity with human deeds and each and every group will be driven to Hell as per their acts.

Likewise, the gates of Paradise conform to deeds.

The name of a gate of Paradise, “the gate of warriors” (bab al-mujahidin) is mentioned by Imam ‘Ali (as):

“Verily, jihad is one of the gates of Paradise.”29

It would be of interest to note that from amongst all human vices, the angels of torment driving man to Hell lay emphasis on arrogance which bears testimony to the fact that disbelief and sin mainly spring from arrogance and disobedience against the Truth.

Arrogance casts thick veils over man’s eyes and deprives him of perceiving the illuminating countenance.

Likewise, it is narrated from Imam Sadiq and Imam Baqir (as):

“One who entertains the slightest degree of arrogance in his heart may not enter Paradise.”30

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 73

وَسِيقَ الَّذِينَ اتَّقَوْا رَبَّهُمْ إِلَی الْجَنَّةِ زُمَراً حَتَّی إِذَا جَاءُوهَا وَفُتِحَتْ أَبْوَابُهَا وَقَالَ لَهُمْ خَزَنَتُهَا سَلامٌ عَلَيْكُمْ طِبْتُمْ فَادْخُلُوهَا خَالِدِينَ

73. And those who kept their duty to their Lord will be led to Paradise in groups till when they reach it and its gates will be opened and its keepers will say peace be upon you! You have done well, so enter here to abide therein!

Purity is the prerequisite to being admitted to Paradise which has come into being owing to either someone’s primordial natural disposition or repentance.

According to a narration narrated from Imam ‘Ali (as) in Kitab al-Khisal,

“Paradise has eight gates, each of which is for a certain group: one for Prophets and sincerely devout believers, one for martyrs and good doers, five for my adherents (shi’a), and one for Muslims who bear no grudge against me.”31

The blessed Verse in question resumes the discussion on the hereafter. The preceding Verses treated of the manner by which believers enter Hell but the Verse in question expresses the way righteous believers enter Paradise so that the comparison sheds further light on the issue.

The Verse opens with saying that those who feared God shall be taken to Paradise in groups.

The expression:

“will be led” (siqa),

taken from s-w-q (“drive, lead”) in the clause:

“Those who kept their duty to their Lord will be led to Paradise”

arises a question attracting the attention of many an exeget, since the expression is employed when something is carried out without enthusiasm and inclination.

It is true about the people of Hell but why is it used for the people of Paradise who enthusiastically proceed toward Paradise?

Some exegets suggest that the enthusiasm of meeting their Lords has attracted their attention to such an extent that they do not heed anything besides him, even Paradise. Some maintain that they are alighted on mounts taking them to Paradise in no time.

All these suggestions are consistent and stand to reason, but it is worthy of note that the best interpretation may be the fact that the more the righteous are eager to enter Paradise, Paradise and angels of Mercy are more eager to admit them to their everlasting abode.

Likewise, a host may at times be so eager to meet his guest that he will take him faster than the guest proceeding toward him.

It is noteworthy that the word:

zumar (“small group”)

indicates that the people of Paradise proceed toward their everlasting abode in different groups revealing the hierarchy of their spiritual states.

Upon reaching Paradise, they notice that the gates have been already opened to them.

Then the guardians and keepers of Paradise, the angels of Mercy say unto them:

“Peace be upon you! You have done will, so enter here to abide therein!”

It would be of interest to note that upon reaching Hell, the gates open where as the gates had been already open for people of paradise.

Having already been open makes a reference to the respect paid to the people of Paradise, like a host who has opened the gate of his house and willingly awaiting to meet his guest. The angels of Divine Mercy act accordingly.

The preceding Verse treated of the people of Hell who are reproached by the angels of torment upon their arrival censuring them that despite the availability of the means of guidance, such misfortune befell them. However, the people of Paradise are welcomed by greetings and words revealing respect and homage following which they will be invited to enter their everlasting abode!

The verbal form:

tibtum (“you have done well”)

is taken from t-’-b (“be good, be pleased”), which following greetings is used in the sense of “be pleased, be happy,” in other words, thus the angels say unto them:

“Enjoy these pure Bounties, O you who are pure of heart and nature!”

However, many an exeget consider the clause to be in the indicative mood taking it to mean that the angels say unto them:

“You have been purified of any impurity. Faith and righteous good deeds have purified your hearts and souls. You are absolved of your sins.”

Some of the exegets even cite a narration according to which there is a tree at the gate of Paradise underneath which there is a fountain of pure water from which believers drink and thus purify themselves inwardly.

They wash themselves in another spring and thus cleanse themselves outwardly.

Then the keepers of Paradise say unto them:

“peace be upon you! You have done well, so enter here to abide therein!”32

It is to be noted that

“everlasting abode”

is mentioned for peoples of Hell and Paradise so as the former know that there is no deliverance and the latter may not entertain any concern regarding the transience of Divine Bounties.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 74

وَقَالُوا الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي صَدَقَنَا وَعْدَهُ وَأَوْرَثَنَا الْأَرْضَ نَتَبَوَّأُ مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ حَيْثُ نَشَاءُ فَنِعْمَ أَجْرُ الْعَامِلِينَ

74. And [the people of Paradise] will say: “Praise be to Allah Who has fulfilled His Promise to us and has made us inherit the land. We can dwell in Paradise where we will.” How excellent a reward for good doers!

It is the permanent disposition of the people of Paradise to say:

“Praise be to Allah”

following enjoyment of Divine Bounties.

The blessed Verse in question mentions four terse clauses revealing their utmost satisfaction:

“Praise be to Allah Who has fulfilled His Promise to us.”

The Verse further adds:

“[He] has made us inherit the land.”

“The land”

ad hoc designates “the land of Paradise” and

“inherit”

indicates that so many bounties are bestowed upon them for little efforts. It is common knowledge that inheritance refers to something fallen into someone’s share without taking troubles. It may also allude to the fact that everyone has a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.

When he turns into one of the people of hell for his vicious deeds, his place in Paradise will be assigned to others, but if one becomes one of the people of Paradise, his place in Hell will remain there for those doomed to Hell.

It may also indicate that they may use it freely in the same manner that one may make use of his inheritance as he wish.

The clause actually reveals the fulfillment of Divine Promise which is also mentioned in 19:63,

“Such is the Paradise which we shall give as an inheritance to those of Our servants who have been God fearing.”

The third clause thus indicates their free will in making use of their Lord’s vast Paradise:

“We can dwell in Paradise where we will.”

Different Qur’anic Verses indicate that there are many a Garden in Paradise and the expression

“the everlasting Gardens of Paradise” (jannat ‘adn,33 )

refers to the same. People of Paradise dwell in them according to their spiritual states and stations. Thus they may freely select their abodes in the vast Gardens of Paradise.

They never opt for stations more exalted than theirs nor do they request the attainment to the same.

Finally, thus they say in the last clause:

“How excellent a reward for good doers!”

Good doers are those who act upon Divine Commands. It reveals that such rewards are bestowed because of past righteous good deeds.

Such excellence stems from faith and good deeds. Who asks the last clause, God Almighty or the people of Paradise?

Qur’anic exegets maintain that both are possible but it would be more consistent with other clauses in the same Verse if we considered it as an expression of surprise uttered by the people of Paradise.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 75

وَتَرَی الْمَلائِكَةَ حَافِّينَ مِنْ حَوْلِ الْعَرْشِ يُسَبِّحُونَ بِحَمْدِ رَبِّهِمْ وَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْحَقِّ وَقِيلَ الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ

75. And you will see the angels surrounding the Throne, glorifying their Lord with praises. And they will be judged with truth and it will be said: “All the praises are to Allah, the Lord of the world.”

The word:

hafin (“those who surround”)

derives from h-f-f (“surround”) and ‘arsh is the seat of Divine Omnipotence and Will. Angels are prepared to act upon Divine Commands;

(“surrounding the Throne”)

glorifying their Lord at all times.

The closing Verse of the Chapter in question is an address to the Noble Prophet (S), saying:

“[On that Day,] you will see the angels surrounding Divine Throne circumambulating it and glorifying their Lord with praises.”

Making a reference to the angels surrounding Divine Throne either indicates their preparation for acting upon Divine Commands or alludes to the cherished spiritual state of those close to Divine Threshold on that Day. The three interpretations are not inconsistent, but the first interpretation sounds more appropriate.

Thus the blessed Verse in question proceeds:

“They [i.e., Lord’s servants] will be judged with truth.”

Since they serve as tokens of Divine Lordship and glorification of His Pure Essence with all praises, thus the Verse closes:

“All the praises are to Allah, the Lord of the world.”

Who says it? People of Paradise? The righteous? All of them? Seemingly, the last choice is more appropriate since the wise and those close to Divine Threshold glorify God Almighty with praises and thanks.

O Lord! Unanimously with all angels and your obedient servants, we all thank you for the Bounties that You have bestowed upon us, particularly studying the Verses of Your Holy Qur’an saying: “Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the World.

Notes

1. As per many a tradition narrated from Shi’i Imams (as), “beside Allah” is interpreted as “Shi’i Imams,” for instance a tradition narrated from Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (as) mentioned in Usul Kafi interprets “Alas, my grief that I was undutiful to Allah” as: “‘Beside Allah’ indicates the Commander of the Faithful, Ali (as) and also his eminent successors to the last of them [i.e., Imam Mahdi (as)].” It is also reported from Imam Sadiq (as) in ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim’s exegetic work that “We are ‘beside Allah.’” See Tafsir Nur al-Thiqalayn, vol. 4, p. 495.

2. 6:28

3. See also the Holy Qur’an, 23:100.

4. 29:65

5. Tafsir Burhan.

6. 3:106-107

7. Nur al-Thiqalayn [Exegesis], vol. 4, p.496.

8. Majma’ al-Bayan, under the Verse in question.

9. Kafi, vol. 1, the chapter on the transmission of books and traditions (Bab Riwayat al-Kutub wa ‘l-Hadith), vol. 14.

10. 2:34

11. ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim’s Tafsir (“Exegesis”), apud Nur al-Thiqalayn, vol. 4, p. 496; the same theme in Tafsir Safi, under the Verses in question.

12. 14:18

13. Nur al-Thiqalayn, vol. 4, p. 497.

14. Ibid.

15. 21:104

16. al-Mizan and Durr al-Manthur [exegetic works].

17. 74:8

18. ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim’s Tafsir [“Exegesis”], apud Nur al-Thiqalayn.

19. 27:87

20. 57:12

21. Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 6, p. 321.

22. Ruh al-Ma’ani and Ruh al-Bayan, under the Verses in question.

23. 18:49

24. 7:6

25. 50:21

26. 50:21

27. 2:39

28. 32:13

29. Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 27.

30. Kafi, vol. 2, Chapter on Arrogance (Bab al-Kibr), tradition 6.

31. Tafsir al-Mizan.

32. Tafsir Qurtubi, vol. 8, p. 574.

33. 9:72

Surah al-Zumar, Verses 56 - 75

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 56

أَنْ تَقُولَ نَفْسٌ يَا حَسْرَتَی عَلَی مَا فَرَّطْتُ فِي جَنْبِ اللَّهِ وَإِنْ كُنْتُ لَمِنَ السَّاخِرِينَ

56. Lest a person should say “Alas, my grief that I was undutiful to Allah and I was indeed among those who mocked [His Verses].”

The Day of Resurrection is the Day of Regret. Underrating Divine Injunctions, and worse than that, mocking them all spring from neglect.

Following the emphatic injunction as to repentance and compensation for the past wrong deeds, the blessed Verse in question is saying that these injunctions have been sent down lest on the Day of Resurrection one may say:

“Woe to me that I failed to act upon Divine Command and I mocked His Verses and Messengers.”

The word hasra is employed in the sense of sorrow and grief caused by past regrettable acts. In his Mufradat, Raghib says that the word derives from hasr indicating pull way or remove garment but it figuratively connotes regret about and grieve for the past acts as if the veils of ignorance have been removed.

When man is raised on the Day of Resurrection and perceives the consequences of his transgressions of bounds, neglects, sins, underrating serious affairs, will cry out “Woe to me!” A dire sense of grief and regret wraps up his heart and expresses himself with such interjections.

Exegets differ as to the meaning of

janb Allah (“beside Allah”)

and present many a suggestion.

The word is literally employed in the sense of side and it applies to anything located at the side of something else, in the same manner that yamin and yasar signify right and left sides of the body respectively, but owing to generalization, they imply anything located at the left and right sides.

The phrase:

“beside Allah”

also ad hoc designate all the affairs beside Him, e.g. His Command, Obedience to Him, Closeness to Him, The Divine Books sent down by Him.

Thus, the sinful regret about and grieve for their undutifulness against Allah and particularly lay emphasis on mocking Qur’anic Verses and Divinely appointed Messengers, since their wrong acts mainly stem from their neglect and derision which in turn spring from ignorance, vanity, and bias.1

Surah al-Zumar - Verses 57 - 58

أَوْ تَقُولَ لَوْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ هَدَانِي لَكُنْتُ مِنَ الْمُتَّقِينَ

أَوْ تَقُولَ حِينَ تَرَی الْعَذَابَ لَوْ أَنَّ لِي كَرَّةً فَأَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ

57. Or [lest] he should say [out of profound grief]: “If only Allah has guided me, I should indeed have been among the righteous.”

58. Or [lest] he should say when he sees the torment: “If only I had another chance [to return to the world] then I should be among the good doers.”

On the Resurrection Day, sinners aim to acquit themselves of their sins. On the Day of Resurrection the sinful wish that they could return to the world in order to do good [to himself and others].

The blessed Verse in question says:

“Lest that the sinful say: ‘Had God guided me, I would have been among the righteous.’”

Such words are apparently uttered upon reckoning, noticing that some people proceed toward Paradise enjoying all Bounties for their righteous good deeds. He also wishes that he could accompany them to Paradise.

Verse 60 is saying that upon experiencing Divine Chastisement, he wishes that he could return to the world to become one of the righteous. Upon treading the way to Hell, he notices the blazing fire and the excruciating torment, he sighs wishing that he could be permitted to return to the world and compensate for his sins through committing righteous deeds and become one of the good doers.

Thus, each of the three words are uttered at certain times: noticing the Resurrection he regrets his past deeds; perceiving the rewards of the righteous, he wishes that the same were in store for him; experiencing Divine Chastisement, he wishes that he could return to the world and compensate for his past deeds.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 59

بَلَی قَدْ جَاءَتْكَ آيَاتِي فَكَذَّبْتَ بِهَا وَاسْتَكْبَرْتَ وَكُنْتَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ

59. Yes! Indeed, there came unto you My Verses but you denied them and were vain and were among disbelievers.

The sinful express some words on the Day of Resurrection:

1. Confessing to neglect

2. Confessing to derision

3. Wishing for guidance

4. Wishing for returning to the world.

God Almighty accepts his confessions but concerning the third word, the blessed Verse in question says that God Almighty provided you with Guidance but he denied it.

An answer provided for the fourth word is to be found elsewhere:

“Even if they are returned [to the world] they shall still be wrong doers.”

A reply is provided for the second word as per which Divine Verses came unto him; however, he denied them and was vain and one of the disbelievers. He is saying that had Divine Guidance came unto him, he would have been one of the righteous.

What is Divine Guidance but some many Divine Books, God’s Messengers, Divine Verses and Signs of Truth in horizons and souls? He saw and heard them all but what was his reaction toward them but denial, vanity, and disbelief?

Would it be possible that God Almighty chastises anyone without warning them? Was he different from the guided in terms of Divine Guidance? Therefore, he is to blame for his evil deeds. Vanity and denial of Divine Verses and Signs are the main reasons that lead to disbelief and faithlessness.

No answer is suggested for the first word, since it is an inevitable reality - they have to regret and grieve for their past vicious deeds. Regarding the third word, i.e., request for being returned to the world, numerous answers are provided, e.g.:

“if they were returned [to the world], they would certainly revert to that which they were forbidden. And indeed they are liars”2 .3

Furthermore, the reply suggested for the second word may make a reference to the reply provided for this question as well - what is the goal of returning to the world? Is it anything other than being warned against vicious deeds?

It is worthy of note that God Almighty had already warned them and such further warnings would be futile. Experiencing torment in the Hereafter is their sudden awakening which will be rendered futile upon their return to the world.

In the same vein, the Holy Qur’an makes mention of polytheists entangled in the agitated sea invoking God with sincere devotion but upon stepping on the shore they consign everything to oblivion:

(“And when they embark on a ship, they invoke Allah, making their faith pure for Him only: but when He brings them safely to land, behold, they give a share of their worship to others,”4 ).

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 60

وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ تَرَی الَّذِينَ كَذَبُوا عَلَی اللَّهِ وُجُوهُهُمْ مُسْوَدَّةٌ أَلَيْسَ فِي جَهَنَّمَ مَثْویً لِلْمُتَكَبِّرِينَ

60. And on the Day of Resurrection you will see those who lied against Allah - their faces will be black. Is there not in Hell an abode for the vain?

Lying against Allah are of diverse kinds:

1. Associating other objects of worship with Him

2. Likening God Almighty to something

3. Regarding angels as God’s offspring

4. Attributing one’s vicious act to God Almighty

5. Pretending to be God or Divinely appointed Messenger

6. Making distortions and innovations in Divine Commands.

It is narrated in traditions that forging traditions and narrating them from the Infallible Imams (as) are on a par with lying against God Almighty, since the Infallible Imams narrate from the Noble Prophet (S) and the Prophet (S) imparts Divine Word.5

Pursuant to the words of the lying polytheists and the arrogant on the Day of Resurrection regretting about their past vicious deeds and their request as to being returned to the world to compensate for their past deeds which is a futile and unacceptable request, the blessed Verses in question treat of the same question saying:

“And on the Day of Resurrection you will see those who lied against Allah - their faces will be black.”

Although the meaning of

“lied against Allah”

is broad in its semantic range, but it is ad hoc applied to associating partners with God and claiming that angels, Jesus Christ (as), and the like are His offspring.

The word mustakbir indicates arrogant, but it is herein employed to refer to those who waxed arrogance against Divinely appointed messengers calling people to the Religion of Truth and their denial of them. The liars’ blackened face on the Day of Resurrection reveals their disgrace and humility.

It is well known that secrets will be manifest and man’s thought and deeds will be embodied on the Day of Resurrection. Those who have black hearts and their deeds were dark like their thought will be seen with dark and blackened faces on that Day.

In other words, what is concealed shall be manifest and faces shall reflect hearts as a consequence of which those with black hearts shall appear with blackened faces and those whose hearts are illuminating shall appear with bright faces on that Day.

It is mentioned elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an6 :

“On the Day [of Resurrection] when some faces will become white and some faces will become black; as for those whose faces will become black [unto them will be said]: ‘Did you reject faith after accepting it? Then taste the torment [in Hell] for rejecting faith.’ And for those whose faces will become white, they will be in Allah’s Mercy, therein they shall dwell forever.”

According to a number of traditions narrated from the Shi’i Imams (as), lying against Allah will lead to blackness of face on the Day of Resurrection is broader in its semantic range as per which it includes false claims to the leadership of the Muslim community (umma).

In the same vein, in his I’tiqadat, Shaykh Saduq narrates from Imam Sadiq that upon being asked as to the interpretation of the blessed Verse in question, he replied:

“It refers to one who pretends to be the Imam.”

He was asked regarding such person whether he happens to be a descendant of ‘Ali and Fatima (as), to which he replied:

“Even if he happens to be of such descent.”7

It clearly bears testimony to the fact that false claim to Divine leadership and Imamate is an instance of lying against God. In the same vein, those who lie against the Noble Prophet (S) and the Infallible Imams will be on a par with those who lie against Allah.

Thus, it is reported in another tradition narrated from Imam Sadiq (as):

“Whoever transmits a tradition from us, we will ask him some day regarding its truth.

If he happens to be in the right and he is one of us, he has attributed a true word to God Almighty and His Messenger (S), but if he lied against us, he has lied against God and His Messenger (S), since when we report a tradition, we do not say such and such a person reported thus, but we say God or His Messenger (S) said it.

Then he recited the Verse:

‘And on the Day of Resurrection you will see those who lied against Allah - their faces will be black.’”8

The tradition clearly bears testimony to the fact that the Shi’i Imams (as) transmitted nothing of their own, but all the sound traditions narrated on their authorities trace back to Prophetic traditions.

The fact in question is worthy of note for all Muslim scholars; therefore those who do not acknowledge their Imamate are supposed to acknowledge the veracity of their transmissions as Prophetic traditions.

In the same vein, another tradition is narrated from Imam Sadiq (as) in Kafi as per which:

“The tradition narrated by each of the Imams is another tradition and our tradition is that of the Messenger of God (S).”9

It is worthy of note that Qur’anic Verses clearly refer to the fact that disbelief mainly stems from vanity, as the Qur’anic Verse10 says:

“He refused and was arrogant and was one of the disbelievers.”

Thus, the arrogant may not dwell nowhere but in Hell.

According to a Prophetic tradition:

“There is an abode in Hell for the arrogant called Saqar which once complained to God Almighty about the unbearable heat and requested Him to take a breath. Upon obtaining the Permission, it took a breath and set Hell ablaze.11

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 61

وَيُنَجِّي اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ اتَّقَوْا بِمَفَازَتِهِمْ لا يَمَسُّهُمُ السُّوءُ وَلا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ

61. And Allah will deliver those who are the righteous with their success, untouched by evil in the least, nor shall they grieve.

Fear of God leads to deliverance and the God fearing entertain no grief.

The blessed Verse in question treats of the righteous and their happiness on the Day of Resurrection as opposed to the arrogant and the vain, saying:

“Allah will deliver those who are the righteous with their success.”

Their deliverance and success are explicated with two terse clauses:

“[They are] untouched by evil in the least, nor shall they grieve.”

They live in a world devoid of anything but good, purity, and happiness. The brief expression actually encompasses all Divine Bounties.

Surah al-Zumar - Verses 62 - 63

اللَّهُ خَالِقُ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ وَهُوَ عَلَی كُلِّ شَيْءٍ وَكِيلٌ

لَهُ مَقَالِيدُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِآياتِ اللَّهِ أُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْخَاسِرُونَ

62. Allah is the Creator of all things and He is the Guardian, Preserver, and Controller of all things.

63. To Him belongs the keys of the heavens and the earth. And those who disbelieve in Divine Signs and Verses, such are they who will be the losers.

The real monotheist believes in all dimensions of Divine Unity: Unity in Creatorship, Unity in Lordship, and Unity in worship.

The following Verse says:

“Do you order me to worship other than Allah?”

In other words, all existent beings need Him in creation and survival.

“Allah is the Creator of all things and He is the Guardian, Preserver, and Controller of all things.”

The first and the second clauses refer to Unity in Creatorship and Unity in Lordship respectively.

It is noteworthy that even most of the polytheists admitted Unity of Creatorship, as it is reflected in Verse 38 of the Chapter in question:

“If you ask them [i.e., disbelievers]” ‘Who created the heavens and the earth?’ Surely they will say: ‘Allah.’”

However, they had gone astray concerning Unity of Lordship, since they regarded idols as their guardians, preservers and disposers of their affairs and sought refuge in them in hardships.

The Holy Qur’an actually makes a reference to such belief saying that disposing the affairs of the world as well as its preservation and protection are at the hand of its Creator, as a consequence of which, people are supposed to seek refuge in Him at all times.

In his Lisan al-’Arab, Ibn Mansur makes mention of different senses for the word wakil, e.g. guardian, preserver, and disposer of affairs. Thus, it becomes evident that idols lead to neither gain, nor loss. They neither solve problems, nor do they make problems. They are weak and useless objects incapable of doing anything.

The clause:

“Allah is the Creator of all things”

is employed by some adherents of the school of predestination as an argument for their false belief, saying that their acts are referred to in the Verse in question, hence, Allah is the Creator of such acts, even if people physically carry out such acts.

Their gross mistake stems from their inability to comprehend that Divine Lordship as to man’s acts has nothing to do with his free will, since Divine Will and human will are not parallel but rather interrelated lengthwise; in other words, man’s acts are related to God and to himself.

On the one hand, all things in the world of existence are encompassed by Divine Omnipotence hence his acts are created by Him, since He provides man with power, intellect, free will, and the required means to act. Consequently, man’s acts may be ascribed to Him.

He wills that man enjoys free will to act. He provides man will the means required for acting upon his will. Yet, man is free to choose his acts, as a consequence of which such acts are ascribed to him and he is responsible against them.

One who claims that man is the creator of his own acts and God has nothing to do with them is a polytheist, since he believes in two creators, the Great Creator and the small creator.

If one claims that God is the Creator of his acts and he has nothing to do with it, he has gone astray since he has denied Divine Wisdom and Justice.

Would it be possible that man be responsible for His Acts? If so, responsibility, obligation, the Hereafter, reckoning, chastisement and reward would be meaningless.

Therefore, the standard Muslim dogmas based on Qur’anic Verses demonstrate that all human acts are ascribed both to Him and man and such ascription is not inconsistent in the least, since the relation between the two is not parallel but lengthwise.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 64 - 65

قُلْ أَفَغَيْرَ اللَّهِ تَأْمُرُونِّي أَعْبُدُ أَيُّهَا الْجَاهِلُونَ

وَلَقَدْ أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ وَإِلَی الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ لَئِنْ أَشْرَكْتَ لَيَحْبَطَنَّ عَمَلُكَ وَلَتَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ

64. Say: “Do you order me to worship other than Allah? O you fools!”

65. And indeed it has been revealed to you as it was to those [Messengers] before you: “If you join others in worship with Allah, surely your deeds will be in vain and you will certainly be among the losers.

The Verses in question are mainly addressed to the Noble Prophet (S) but all people are also involved in such affairs; yet, God Almighty addresses the Prophet (S) owing to the significance of the issue indicating that even if the Prophet (S) disbelieves for a single moment, his deeds will be in vain and he will be among the losers.

Thus, Verse 65 draws a neat distinction between belief and disbelief, saying:

“indeed it has been revealed to you as it was to those [Messengers] before you: ‘If you join others in worship with Allah, surely your deeds will be in vain and you will certainly be among the losers.’”

Therefore, disbelief leads to two consequences which may affect Divinely appointed Messenger in case of their disbelief: vanity of deeds and being a loser in one’s life. The former refers to futility of righteous good deeds owing to disbelief since such acts will solely be acknowledged if one believes in Divine Unity.

Disbelief is likened to a blazing fire burning the tree of human deeds, a lightening setting ablaze all the crops of his life, a tempest rendering human deeds futile, as mentioned elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an12 :

“The parable of those who disbelieved in their Lord is that their works are as ashes, on which the wind blows furiously on a stormy day; they shall not be able to get aught of what they have earned. That is the straying, far away.”

According to a prophetic tradition:

“God Almighty reckons the deeds of all servants unless they disbelieve; surely they shall be sent to Fire without reckoning.”13

Disbelievers will be among losers since they lose their most valuable possessions, i.e., intellect and life, in this spacious market of mundane world and fail to purchase anything except for regret and grief.

A question arises here: Would it be possible that Divinely appointed eminent prophets turn to disbelief as a consequence of which the Verse in question treats them in such harsh tone?

The answer to this question is crystal clear: they shall never turn to disbelief even if they enjoy the free will to do so and infallibility is not on a par with the loss of free will.

It is to be noted that their excellence of knowledge and their immediate and constant nexus with the Origin of Divine Revelation hinders them to entertain disbelief for one single moment. Would it be imaginable that an intelligent physician aware of the effects of a fatal poisonous substance entertains the thought of its consumption?

The Verse aims to warn people of the great risk of entertaining disbelief so as to inform them that God Almighty warns His Messengers about disbelief. It reminds one of the Arabic proverb:

“I mean you, but O neighbor! Listen to it!”

According to a tradition narrated from Imam ‘Ali ibn Musa al-Rida, inquired by Ma’mun concerning the Verses in question, he said:

“Such Verses refer to the Muslim community, even if the Messenger of God (S) is addressed herein.”14

Surah al-Zumar - Verses 66 - 67

بَلِ اللَّهَ فَاعْبُدْ وَكُنْ مِنَ الشَّاكِرِينَ

وَمَا قَدَرُوا اللَّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِ وَالْأَرْضُ جَمِيعاً قَبْضَتُهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَالسَّمَاوَاتُ مَطْوِيَّاتٌ بِيَمِينِهِ سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَی عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ

66. Nay! But worship Allah alone and be among the grateful.

67. They did not appreciate Allah as such as is due to Him, though on the Day of Resurrection the whole of the earth shall be subject to His Omnipotence and the heavens will be rolled up in His Hand. Glorified is He and Exalted is He above all that they associate as partners with Him.

Monotheism is the best manner of deliverance from loss and harm; likewise one may show his gratitude toward God Almighty is to worship Him.

Thus the blessed Verse lays further emphasis:

“Nay! But worship Allah alone and be among the grateful.”

Precedence of Allah is for specification (hasr), i.e., you are solely supposed to worship the Pure Essence of Allah. What follows is the Divine Injunction to gratitude since showing gratitude for Divine Bounties bestowed upon man may serve as a means of knowing God and rejection of any kind of polytheism and disbelief.

Gratitude for Divine Bounties is in human primordial natural disposition, but it is supposed to follow the provider of bounties. Consequently, it leads to the acknowledgement of Divine Unity and thus idols which provide man with no bounty are abandoned.

Verse 67 treats of another exposition for rejection of polytheism and disbelief regarding it mainly to stem from not knowing God deservingly as a consequence of which his Sacred Name was relegated to those of idols:

(“They did not appreciate Allah as such as is due to Him”).

Polytheism and disbelief mainly spring from lack of appreciating God Almighty as such.

One who knows that His Existence is Boundless, He is the Creator of all creatures and they are at all times in need of His Source of Emanation and Divine Bounty, He is the Dispenser of the world of existence and He is the One Who solves all problems, He is the Provider of all existent beings and intercession depends on His Permission and Command, may not turn to another being.

It is worthy of note that duality is not applicable to God Almighty since two boundless beings are not reasonably possible.

To express Divine Omnipotence and Glory, the Verse in question employs a figurative expression saying:

“on the Day of Resurrection the whole of the earth shall be subject to His Omnipotence.”

The word qabda is applied to what is grasped by hand and it is usually used figuratively in the sense of absolute power and sway in the same manner that it is said in daily speech that such and such city or such and such property are in hand of so and so.

The word matwwiyat is taken from tayy which literally denotes “to be enclosed” and at times it connotes “transience of life” or “passing by something.”

The aforesaid expression is more clearly attested elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an15 :

“The Day when We shall roll up the heavens like a scroll rolled up for books.”

It is to be noted that one who has rolled up a scroll holding it in his hand wields perfect sway over it.

The choice of the word:

yamin (“right hand”)

is due to the fact that right hand is usually used by most of the people for carrying out tasks of significance since they feel that it is stronger than the left one.

In short, all these similes and expressions connote absolute sway of the Creator over the world of existence in this world and the Hereafter so that all men comprehend that in the Hereafter, the key to deliverance and the solution of problems is in the Hand of God Almighty lest they turn to idols and other objects of worship for intercession and any other support.

Are not the earth and the heavens under His Sway? Why do they make mention of the Hereafter? The reply to these questions is that on that Day, Divine Omnipotence shall be more manifest than any other time as It shall be evident to such extent that all men shall clearly perceive that all things belong to Him and they are under His Sway.

Furthermore, on the Day of Resurrection, some men may turn to others besides God Almighty for deliverance, in the same manner that Christians raise the question of deliverance for worshipping Jesus Christ (as). It is in this vein that the Verse treats of Divine Omnipotence on the Day of Resurrection.

The above clearly bears testimony to the fact that all these expressions are figurative and it is because of the brevity of words in our daily life that we have to express such exalted meanings with such small words.

Only very simple and narrow minded people may entertain Divine anthropomorphism in their minds. Since words fail to convey Divine Glory, one has to make use of such words in their figurative meanings with their broader semantic range.

It is noteworthy that a clear but terse conclusion closes the Verse:

“Glorified is He and Exalted is He above all that they associate as partners with Him.”

Had man not pass judgments with his limited thought concerning His Glorified and Pure Essence, he would have never turned toward polytheism and idolatry.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 68

وَنُفِخَ فِي الصُّورِ فَصَعِقَ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَنْ فِي الْأَرْضِ إِلَّا مَنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ ثُمَّ نُفِخَ فِيهِ أُخْرَی فَإِذَا هُمْ قِيَامٌ يَنْظُرُونَ

68. And the Trumpet Shall be blown and all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth shall swoon away [and die], except him whom Allah wills. Then it shall be blown a second time and they shall suddenly rise up, looking [around].

All men die upon the blowing of the Trumpet; thus, the exception attested in the clause:

“except him whom Allah wills”

makes a reference to Divine Omnipotence. In other words, God Almighty wields absolute sway over the world of existence and when all die, He keeps alive those whom He wills. According to a number of traditions, [Archangels] Jibra’il, Israfil, and Mika’il, and also martyrs are mentioned among those who shall stay alive.16

The preceding Verses treated of the Day of Resurrection and blessed Verse in question pursues the same question and makes mention of many a characteristic thereof.

It opens with the end of the world, saying:

“And the Trumpet Shall be blown and all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth shall swoon away [and die], except him whom Allah wills.”

The Verse proceeds with saying:

“Then it shall be blown a second time and they shall suddenly rise up, looking [around].”

The Verse clearly indicates that a sudden happening shall occur at the end of the world and the beginning of Resurrection. All animate beings immediately die at the end of the world and following an interlude, all human beings shall be suddenly raised and await Reckoning upon Resurrection.

The Holy Qur’an expresses these two incidents as:

“blowing of the Trumpet”

serving as an elegant metaphorical expression connoting sudden and simultaneous incidents, since nafkh denotes “blowing” and sur is employed in the sense of trumpet or a hollow horn usually used for setting caravan and or army to get underway or march or making them stop.

It is worthy of note that the two differed in tunes. The expression also connotes the ease of carrying out the task indicating that God Almighty raises all with one single Command likened to blowing of the trumpet used for getting the caravan underway.

It has been repeatedly mentioned above that our words are invented for our limited daily life hence they fail to precisely convey the truths of the metaphysical world upon the end of this world and the beginning of the other world as a consequence of which we have to attend to the existing evidence and use ordinary words in a broader semantic range.

It is worthy of note that diverse expressions are attested in the Holy Qur’an as to the end of this world and the beginning of the world to come.

In this vein, different Verses (more than ten Verses) treat of:

“blowing of the Trumpet.”

In one instance17 mention is made of nuqira fi al-naqur which bears the sense of blowing the trumpet and the like:

(“Then when the Trumpet is sounded. Verily, that Day shall be a Hard Day”).

The expression:

qari’a (“rigorous striking”)

is also attested in 101:1-3.

The same theme is also expressed by the word:

sayha (“harsh shout”)

as in 36:49:

“They await only but a single shout which will seize them while they are disputing,”

which treats of the shout heard at the end of the world which takes men unawares.

Verse 53 of Chapter 36 treats of the shout heard on the Day of Resurrection upon hearing which all men shall raise and they shall be brought before the Just Lord:

“It will be but a single shout, so they shall all be brought up before Us.”

The aforesaid Verses indicate that a very harsh shout shall make all the beings of the heavens and the earth die and it shall be the:

“shout of death.”

They shall all come back to life by a very harsh shout by the time of Resurrection and it shall be the:

“shout of life.”

What is precisely the manner of the twain shouts? In what manner do they impress the beings?

Nobody save God Almighty knows the answer to this question. Treating of the Trumpet to be blown by Israfil at the end the world, a number of traditions indicate that all the beings of the heavens die upon blowing the Trumpet and God Almighty issues the Command of his death bidding him to die and he shall die.18

The majority of Qur’anic exegets interpret nafkh fi al-sur as

“blowing the Trumpet,”

as mentioned above. These are delicate expressions concerning the manner of the end of the world and the beginning of Resurrection. The question raised at the close of the Verse concerns the number of blowing the Trumpet.

The majority of exegets maintain that it is blown twice and the blessed Verse in question apparently makes a reference to the same.

Taking into account other Qur’anic instances regarding the same indicates the same, such that the first blowing is termed:

fright (“faza’”);

(“And the Day on which the Trumpet will be blown and all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth will be terrified,”19 )

and the second one:

“death and life,”

referred to in Qur’anic Verses some of which were mentioned above, the former and the latter are termed:

“swooning and dying” (sa’q)

and

“rising up” (qiyam).

It is true that there shall not be more than the twain.

Another Qur’anic evidence may be produced for the matter at hand, namely:

“On the Day the earth and the mountains will shake violently.”

The second earthquake shall occur raising servants as peers.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 69

وَأَشْرَقَتِ الْأَرْضُ بِنُورِ رَبِّهَا وَوُضِعَ الْكِتَابُ وَجِيءَ بِالنَّبِيِّينَ وَالشُّهَدَاءِ وَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْحَقِّ وَهُمْ لا يُظْلَمُونَ

69. [On that Day] the earth will shine with the Light of its Lord and the Book of deeds will be placed [forward] and the Prophets and the witnesses will be brought forward and it will be judged between them with truth and they will not be wronged.

The phrase:

“with the Light of its Lord” (bi-nur-i rabbih)

denotes either the Light of Truth and Justice with which God Almighty illuminates the earth on that Day or a Light other than the one shed by sun and moon to be Divinely created on that Day.

The exegetic work Atyab al-Bayan reads:

“Since the light of sun and moon is not apparent,

“the Light of its Lord”

indicates the Light shed by believers,”

then this Verse in cited as evidence thereof:

“On the Day you shall see the believing men and women, their light illuminating before them and by their right hands”20 .

The blessed Verse in question resumes the discussion concerning Resurrection, saying:

“[On that Day] the earth will shine with the Light of its Lord.”

Different interpretations have been suggested as to the “shining” with Divine Light, the most significant of which are the following:

1. Some exegets maintain that Divine Light indicates Truth and Justice with which God Almighty illuminates the face of the earth.

In his Bihar al-Anwar ‘Allama Majlisi says:

“That is, the earth shall be illuminated with Divine Justice on the Day of Resurrection, since Justice is the Light of the earth.”21

Some other exegets maintain that the Prophetic tradition:

“Wrong doing manifests itself as darkness and shadows on the Day of Resurrection”

substantiating the suggestion in question.22

In his Kashshaf, Zamakhshari suggests the same meaning, saying:

“On that Day, the earth shall be illuminated by the administration of justice and fair arbitration of records of righteous and vicious deeds.”

2. Some other exegets hold that it is a reference to a Light other than that of sun and moon which shall be created by God Almighty particularly for that Day.

3. The eminent author of [the exegetic work] Tafsir al-Mizan [‘Allama Tabataba’i] says:

“Illumination of the earth by Divine Light is regarded as one of the characteristics of the Day of Resurrection which is uncovering veils and manifestation of the truth behind things and human deeds including good, evil, obedience, disobedience, truth, and falsehood,”

following which Verse 22 of Chapter 50 is quoted to substantiate the suggested meaning:

“You neglected it, then we unveiled the cover from you and your eyes see it clearly today!”

It is true that Divine Light on that Day encompasses all things, but the emphasis laid on the earth refers to the fact that it makes a reference to the state of people on earth on that Day.

It is to be noted that the aforementioned interpretations are not inconsistent; however the first and the third interpretations sound more appropriate.

The blessed Verse in question indubitably refers to Resurrection and interpreting it in a number of traditions narrated from the Noble Prophet’s (S) Household (as) [Ahl al-Bayt] to Imam Mahdi’s (as) Rise at the end of the world is in fact a kind of comparison and likening, emphasizing that upon his Rise, incidents resembling Resurrection shall occur and he will administer justice as per the nature of the world as the rightful Imam (as), the Successor to the Noble Prophet of Islam (S), and the Vicegerent of God Almighty on the earth.

Mufaddal ibn ‘Umar narrates from Imam Sadiq (as):

“Upon the Rise of our Riser, the earth shall be illuminated by Divine Light and Lord’s servants shall not be in need of sun shine and darkness shall wither away.”

The second clause of the blessed Verse in question treats of the record of deeds, saying that on that Day, the record of deeds shall be put forward and man’s deeds shall be reckoned;

(“And the Book [of deeds] shall be put forward”).

Such records embrace all the significant and non-significant deeds and according to the Holy Qur’an23 :

“What sort of Book is this that leaves neither a small sin nor a grave sin, but has recorded it with numbers!”

The following clause of the blessed Verse in question treating of witnesses further adds:

“the Prophets and the witnesses will be brought forward.”

Prophets shall be summoned to talk to sinners concerning the fulfillment of their Prophetic Missions:

(“We shall definitely inquire the Messengers,”24 ).

Witnesses shall be called to the Just Tribunal to bear witness. It is true that God is Omniscient, but the testimony of witnesses shall be required for laying emphasis on Divine Justice. Who are these witnesses?

Qur’anic exegets are not unanimous on the issue. Some regard the good, the pure, and the just among communities who bear witness to Prophetic Missions and some regard the deeds of the people contemporaneous with Prophets.

The Infallible Imams (as) are regarded as the forerunners of the witnesses.

Substantiating their arguments by the Qur’anic Verse:25

“And every person will come forth along with his companion to drive him to Divine Tribunal and a witness accompanies him,”

some other exegets interpret witnesses as angels bearing testimony to man’s deeds. Yet, there are exegets who interpret the word alluding to bodily members, space, and time of obedience and disobedience as witnesses on the Day of Resurrection.

However, the word

“witnesses”

is apparently employed in its broad semantic range and each of the exegets refer to one of the aspects thereof.

The fourth clause says:

“It will be judged between them with truth.”

The fifth clause further adds:

“They will not be wronged.”

It is evident that when God Almighty wields sway, the earth is illuminated by the Light of His Justice, the record precisely reflecting man’s deeds is put forward, and the Prophets and just witnesses make their presence, the Judgment shall be based on Truth and Justice and wrong doing may not find its way there.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 70

وَوُفِّيَتْ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ مَا عَمِلَتْ وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يَفْعَلُونَ

70. And each person shall be paid in full of what he did and He is Best Aware of what they do.

Divine Chastisement and Reward shall be paid in full.

The sixth clause that completes the foregoing discussion is to be found in the blessed Verse in question:

“Each person shall be paid in full of what he did.”

It is neither the Chastisement nor the Reward of the deeds which shall be given to man but the deeds themselves.

It shall be the best Chastisement and the best Reward that they shall be paid in full and they shall accompany man at all times. Who is able to administer justice so precisely but One Whose Knowledge encompasses everything.

Thus, the seventh and the last clause says:

“He is Best Aware of what they do.”

There is even no need for witnesses, since His Omniscience far exceeds all witnesses. Yet, Divine Favor and Justice require the presence of witnesses. This is the Day of Resurrection for which we have to prepare ourselves.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 71 - 72

وَسِيقَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا إِلَی جَهَنَّمَ زُمَراً حَتَّى إِذَا جَاءُوهَا فُتِحَتْ أَبْوَابُهَا وَقَالَ لَهُمْ خَزَنَتُهَا أَلَمْ يَأْتِكُمْ رُسُلٌ مِنْكُمْ يَتْلُونَ عَلَيْكُمْ آيَاتِ رَبِّكُمْ وَيُنْذِرُونَكُمْ لِقَاءَ يَوْمِكُمْ هَذَا قَالُوا بَلَی وَلَكِنْ حَقَّتْ كَلِمَةُ الْعَذَابِ عَلَی الْكَافِرِينَ

قِيلَ ادْخُلُوا أَبْوَابَ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا فَبِئْسَ مَثْوَی الْمُتَكَبِّرِينَ

71. And those who disbelieved will be driven to Hell in groups till when they reach it the gates thereof will be opened and its keepers shall say: “Did not the Messengers come unto you from yourselves reciting to you the Verses of your Lord warning you of the Meeting of this Day?” They will say: “Yes, [the Messengers came unto us and recited Divine Verses unto us],” but the Command of Divine torment has been justified against disbelievers.

72. It will be said [unto them]: “Enter the gates of Hell to abide therein and what an evil abode of the arrogant.”

Driving sinners toward Hell is a humiliation different from other Chastisements. The blessed Verses in question resume the discussions on Resurrection providing details concerning what was already said concisely in the foregoing Verses regarding the Rewards and Chastisements of believers and unbelievers.

Verse 71 opens with the people of the Hell, saying:

“Those who disbelieved will be driven to Hell in groups.”

Who will drive them to Hell? The answer is that the angels responsible for inflicting torments will drive them to the gates of Hell.

A similar expression is to be found elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an26 :

“And every person will come forth along with his companion to drive him to Divine Tribunal and a witness accompanies him.”

The word:

zumar (“small group”)

indicates that they will be driven in small and scattered groups toward Hell. The word siqa is taken from s-w-q (“to drive”).

The blessed Verse 71 further adds that they proceed toward Hell till they reach it. Then, the gates of Hell will be opened and the guardians of Hell will reproach them thus:

“Did not the Messengers come unto you from yourselves reciting to you the Verses of your Lord warning you of the Meeting of this Day?”

The expression clearly reveals that prior to their arrival, the gates of Hell are shut in the same manner that the gates of prisons are closed but upon the arrival of new comers, they open to them all of a sudden and the sudden opening of the gates inspires more fear and awe in their hearts.

Prior to anything else, the people of Hell bombard them with reproaches saying that all the means of guidance was prepared for you. Messengers from among yourselves used to recite to you Divine Verses and constantly warned you to follow the Straight Path.

What did happen that such misfortune befell you? Such words uttered by guardians of Hell will be among the most excruciating pains by which they will be welcomed upon their entering Hell.

Their reply is a painful brief sentence:

“Yes, the Messengers came unto us and recited Divine Verses unto us and warned us of our disbelief.”

Consequently, the Command of Divine torment will be justified against disbelievers.

Some Qur’anic exegets regard the phrase:

“the Command of Divine torment” (kalimat al-’adhab)

an allusion to Divine Word upon Adams Fall onto the earth or upon Satan’s decision as to deceiving the Children of Adam, as reflected elsewhere in the Qur’an27 :

“But those who disbelieve and belie Our Ayat (“Signs, Verses”), they are the dwellers of the Fire. They shall abide therein forever. When Satan said unto God Almighty that he would deceive all but His sincerely devout servants, He replied: “I will fill Hell with jinn and mankind28 .”

Thus, they confess that they disbelieved the Prophets and Divine Verses and naturally a better fate may not be in store for them.

It is also possible that:

“the Command of Divine torment has been justified against disbelievers”

indicates that at times, owing to committing many a sin and bearing animosity, grudge, and prejudice against Truth, man’s heart is sealed and he may not return in which case the Command of Divine torment will be justified against him.

It is to be noted that such misfortune stems from man’s deeds and there is no room for predestination and lack of human free will.

The brief dialogue at the gates of Hell comes to its end by saying unto them:

“Enter the gates of Hell to abide therein and what an evil abode of the arrogant.”

As mentioned above,

“the gates of Hell”

may refer to those set in conformity with human deeds and each and every group will be driven to Hell as per their acts.

Likewise, the gates of Paradise conform to deeds.

The name of a gate of Paradise, “the gate of warriors” (bab al-mujahidin) is mentioned by Imam ‘Ali (as):

“Verily, jihad is one of the gates of Paradise.”29

It would be of interest to note that from amongst all human vices, the angels of torment driving man to Hell lay emphasis on arrogance which bears testimony to the fact that disbelief and sin mainly spring from arrogance and disobedience against the Truth.

Arrogance casts thick veils over man’s eyes and deprives him of perceiving the illuminating countenance.

Likewise, it is narrated from Imam Sadiq and Imam Baqir (as):

“One who entertains the slightest degree of arrogance in his heart may not enter Paradise.”30

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 73

وَسِيقَ الَّذِينَ اتَّقَوْا رَبَّهُمْ إِلَی الْجَنَّةِ زُمَراً حَتَّی إِذَا جَاءُوهَا وَفُتِحَتْ أَبْوَابُهَا وَقَالَ لَهُمْ خَزَنَتُهَا سَلامٌ عَلَيْكُمْ طِبْتُمْ فَادْخُلُوهَا خَالِدِينَ

73. And those who kept their duty to their Lord will be led to Paradise in groups till when they reach it and its gates will be opened and its keepers will say peace be upon you! You have done well, so enter here to abide therein!

Purity is the prerequisite to being admitted to Paradise which has come into being owing to either someone’s primordial natural disposition or repentance.

According to a narration narrated from Imam ‘Ali (as) in Kitab al-Khisal,

“Paradise has eight gates, each of which is for a certain group: one for Prophets and sincerely devout believers, one for martyrs and good doers, five for my adherents (shi’a), and one for Muslims who bear no grudge against me.”31

The blessed Verse in question resumes the discussion on the hereafter. The preceding Verses treated of the manner by which believers enter Hell but the Verse in question expresses the way righteous believers enter Paradise so that the comparison sheds further light on the issue.

The Verse opens with saying that those who feared God shall be taken to Paradise in groups.

The expression:

“will be led” (siqa),

taken from s-w-q (“drive, lead”) in the clause:

“Those who kept their duty to their Lord will be led to Paradise”

arises a question attracting the attention of many an exeget, since the expression is employed when something is carried out without enthusiasm and inclination.

It is true about the people of Hell but why is it used for the people of Paradise who enthusiastically proceed toward Paradise?

Some exegets suggest that the enthusiasm of meeting their Lords has attracted their attention to such an extent that they do not heed anything besides him, even Paradise. Some maintain that they are alighted on mounts taking them to Paradise in no time.

All these suggestions are consistent and stand to reason, but it is worthy of note that the best interpretation may be the fact that the more the righteous are eager to enter Paradise, Paradise and angels of Mercy are more eager to admit them to their everlasting abode.

Likewise, a host may at times be so eager to meet his guest that he will take him faster than the guest proceeding toward him.

It is noteworthy that the word:

zumar (“small group”)

indicates that the people of Paradise proceed toward their everlasting abode in different groups revealing the hierarchy of their spiritual states.

Upon reaching Paradise, they notice that the gates have been already opened to them.

Then the guardians and keepers of Paradise, the angels of Mercy say unto them:

“Peace be upon you! You have done will, so enter here to abide therein!”

It would be of interest to note that upon reaching Hell, the gates open where as the gates had been already open for people of paradise.

Having already been open makes a reference to the respect paid to the people of Paradise, like a host who has opened the gate of his house and willingly awaiting to meet his guest. The angels of Divine Mercy act accordingly.

The preceding Verse treated of the people of Hell who are reproached by the angels of torment upon their arrival censuring them that despite the availability of the means of guidance, such misfortune befell them. However, the people of Paradise are welcomed by greetings and words revealing respect and homage following which they will be invited to enter their everlasting abode!

The verbal form:

tibtum (“you have done well”)

is taken from t-’-b (“be good, be pleased”), which following greetings is used in the sense of “be pleased, be happy,” in other words, thus the angels say unto them:

“Enjoy these pure Bounties, O you who are pure of heart and nature!”

However, many an exeget consider the clause to be in the indicative mood taking it to mean that the angels say unto them:

“You have been purified of any impurity. Faith and righteous good deeds have purified your hearts and souls. You are absolved of your sins.”

Some of the exegets even cite a narration according to which there is a tree at the gate of Paradise underneath which there is a fountain of pure water from which believers drink and thus purify themselves inwardly.

They wash themselves in another spring and thus cleanse themselves outwardly.

Then the keepers of Paradise say unto them:

“peace be upon you! You have done well, so enter here to abide therein!”32

It is to be noted that

“everlasting abode”

is mentioned for peoples of Hell and Paradise so as the former know that there is no deliverance and the latter may not entertain any concern regarding the transience of Divine Bounties.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 74

وَقَالُوا الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي صَدَقَنَا وَعْدَهُ وَأَوْرَثَنَا الْأَرْضَ نَتَبَوَّأُ مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ حَيْثُ نَشَاءُ فَنِعْمَ أَجْرُ الْعَامِلِينَ

74. And [the people of Paradise] will say: “Praise be to Allah Who has fulfilled His Promise to us and has made us inherit the land. We can dwell in Paradise where we will.” How excellent a reward for good doers!

It is the permanent disposition of the people of Paradise to say:

“Praise be to Allah”

following enjoyment of Divine Bounties.

The blessed Verse in question mentions four terse clauses revealing their utmost satisfaction:

“Praise be to Allah Who has fulfilled His Promise to us.”

The Verse further adds:

“[He] has made us inherit the land.”

“The land”

ad hoc designates “the land of Paradise” and

“inherit”

indicates that so many bounties are bestowed upon them for little efforts. It is common knowledge that inheritance refers to something fallen into someone’s share without taking troubles. It may also allude to the fact that everyone has a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.

When he turns into one of the people of hell for his vicious deeds, his place in Paradise will be assigned to others, but if one becomes one of the people of Paradise, his place in Hell will remain there for those doomed to Hell.

It may also indicate that they may use it freely in the same manner that one may make use of his inheritance as he wish.

The clause actually reveals the fulfillment of Divine Promise which is also mentioned in 19:63,

“Such is the Paradise which we shall give as an inheritance to those of Our servants who have been God fearing.”

The third clause thus indicates their free will in making use of their Lord’s vast Paradise:

“We can dwell in Paradise where we will.”

Different Qur’anic Verses indicate that there are many a Garden in Paradise and the expression

“the everlasting Gardens of Paradise” (jannat ‘adn,33 )

refers to the same. People of Paradise dwell in them according to their spiritual states and stations. Thus they may freely select their abodes in the vast Gardens of Paradise.

They never opt for stations more exalted than theirs nor do they request the attainment to the same.

Finally, thus they say in the last clause:

“How excellent a reward for good doers!”

Good doers are those who act upon Divine Commands. It reveals that such rewards are bestowed because of past righteous good deeds.

Such excellence stems from faith and good deeds. Who asks the last clause, God Almighty or the people of Paradise?

Qur’anic exegets maintain that both are possible but it would be more consistent with other clauses in the same Verse if we considered it as an expression of surprise uttered by the people of Paradise.

Surah al-Zumar - Verse 75

وَتَرَی الْمَلائِكَةَ حَافِّينَ مِنْ حَوْلِ الْعَرْشِ يُسَبِّحُونَ بِحَمْدِ رَبِّهِمْ وَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْحَقِّ وَقِيلَ الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ

75. And you will see the angels surrounding the Throne, glorifying their Lord with praises. And they will be judged with truth and it will be said: “All the praises are to Allah, the Lord of the world.”

The word:

hafin (“those who surround”)

derives from h-f-f (“surround”) and ‘arsh is the seat of Divine Omnipotence and Will. Angels are prepared to act upon Divine Commands;

(“surrounding the Throne”)

glorifying their Lord at all times.

The closing Verse of the Chapter in question is an address to the Noble Prophet (S), saying:

“[On that Day,] you will see the angels surrounding Divine Throne circumambulating it and glorifying their Lord with praises.”

Making a reference to the angels surrounding Divine Throne either indicates their preparation for acting upon Divine Commands or alludes to the cherished spiritual state of those close to Divine Threshold on that Day. The three interpretations are not inconsistent, but the first interpretation sounds more appropriate.

Thus the blessed Verse in question proceeds:

“They [i.e., Lord’s servants] will be judged with truth.”

Since they serve as tokens of Divine Lordship and glorification of His Pure Essence with all praises, thus the Verse closes:

“All the praises are to Allah, the Lord of the world.”

Who says it? People of Paradise? The righteous? All of them? Seemingly, the last choice is more appropriate since the wise and those close to Divine Threshold glorify God Almighty with praises and thanks.

O Lord! Unanimously with all angels and your obedient servants, we all thank you for the Bounties that You have bestowed upon us, particularly studying the Verses of Your Holy Qur’an saying: “Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the World.

Notes

1. As per many a tradition narrated from Shi’i Imams (as), “beside Allah” is interpreted as “Shi’i Imams,” for instance a tradition narrated from Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (as) mentioned in Usul Kafi interprets “Alas, my grief that I was undutiful to Allah” as: “‘Beside Allah’ indicates the Commander of the Faithful, Ali (as) and also his eminent successors to the last of them [i.e., Imam Mahdi (as)].” It is also reported from Imam Sadiq (as) in ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim’s exegetic work that “We are ‘beside Allah.’” See Tafsir Nur al-Thiqalayn, vol. 4, p. 495.

2. 6:28

3. See also the Holy Qur’an, 23:100.

4. 29:65

5. Tafsir Burhan.

6. 3:106-107

7. Nur al-Thiqalayn [Exegesis], vol. 4, p.496.

8. Majma’ al-Bayan, under the Verse in question.

9. Kafi, vol. 1, the chapter on the transmission of books and traditions (Bab Riwayat al-Kutub wa ‘l-Hadith), vol. 14.

10. 2:34

11. ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim’s Tafsir (“Exegesis”), apud Nur al-Thiqalayn, vol. 4, p. 496; the same theme in Tafsir Safi, under the Verses in question.

12. 14:18

13. Nur al-Thiqalayn, vol. 4, p. 497.

14. Ibid.

15. 21:104

16. al-Mizan and Durr al-Manthur [exegetic works].

17. 74:8

18. ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim’s Tafsir [“Exegesis”], apud Nur al-Thiqalayn.

19. 27:87

20. 57:12

21. Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 6, p. 321.

22. Ruh al-Ma’ani and Ruh al-Bayan, under the Verses in question.

23. 18:49

24. 7:6

25. 50:21

26. 50:21

27. 2:39

28. 32:13

29. Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 27.

30. Kafi, vol. 2, Chapter on Arrogance (Bab al-Kibr), tradition 6.

31. Tafsir al-Mizan.

32. Tafsir Qurtubi, vol. 8, p. 574.

33. 9:72


10

11

12