Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

References

1.- Bahr al-Moheet, vol. 3, p. 278; Al-Tafseer al-Kabeer.

2.- Nayshaburi’s Qara’ib al-Qur’an, vol. 2, p. 434, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, Beirut; Mohammad Abdah and Rasheed Rida’s Tafseer al-Minar, vol. 5, p. 181, by Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut.

3.- Al-Tafseer al-Kabeer, the las part of the Qur’anic verse in question.

4.- Al-Kashaf, vol. 1, pp. 276-277, Darl-Ma’rifah, Beirut.

5.- Tabari, Tafseer, vol. 5, p. 95; Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut.

6.- Al-Tabaqat al-Kobra, vol. 5, p. 437, Dar Beirut Liltiba’a wa al-Nashr.

7.- Kitab al-Thiqat, vol. 9, p.42, Al-Kotob al-Thaqafiyyah Institute.

8.- Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 11, p. 221, Dar al-Fikr.

9.- Jami’ Ahkam al-Qur’an, vol. 5, p. 260, Dar al-Fikr; Ahkam al-Qur’an, by Jasses, vol. 2, p. 210, Dar al-Kitab al-Arabi.

10.- Irshad al-’Aqil al-Saleem, Abul So’ud’s commentary, vol. 2, p. 193, Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-Arabi, Beirut.

11.- Tabari’s Tafseer,vol. 5, p. 92, Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut.

12.- Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb, vol.2, p. 181.

13.- Tabari’s Tafseer, vol. 5, p. 92, Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut.

14.- Tahdheedb al-Tahdheeb, vol. 8. p. 138.

15.- Tabari’s Tafseer , p. 92, Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut.

16.- Ibid, p. 92.

17.- Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb, vol. 1, p. 273.

18.- Bukhari’s Saheeh, vol. 3, p. 376, al-Tafseer, the section on “Obey Allah…, tradition 1010; Beirut.

19.- Fath al-Bari, vol8, p. 253.

20.- Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb, vol. 2, p.181.

21.- Tahdhib al-Kamal, vol. 18, p. 373, Al-Risalah Institute.

22.- Tirmidhi’s Sunan, vol. 5, p. 570, tradition 3663.

23.- Mizan al-I’tidal, vol. 2, p. 112, Dar al-Fikr.

24.- Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb, vol. 4, p. 86.

25.- Hakim Hasakani is a great Sunni reporter of narrations concerning whom Dhahabi says, “Ubaydillah ibn Abdullah Mohammad ibn al-Hasan al-Qorashi, al-’Ammeri al-Nayshaburi al-Hanafi, al-Hakim, known as ibn Hadhdhá. He is an adept Sheikh (master) of the science of hadith.

26.- Shawahid al-Tanzeel, vol. 2, p. 190, the Institute of al-Tab’ wa al-Nashr.

27.- Shawahid al-Tanzeel, vol. 2, p. 195, the Institute of al-Tab’ wa al-Nashr.

28.- Al-Mustadrak, vol. 3, p. 121, Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut.

29.- Tirmidhi’s Sahih, vol. 5, pp. 621-2, Dar al-Fikr; Ahmad’s Musnad, vol. 3, pp. 17 and 59; also, vol. 5, pp. 181 and 189, Dar Sadir, Beirut; Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol. 3, pp. 190-110, Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut; Khasa’is al-Nisaii, p. 93, Maktabahi Ninavi, there are many other sources quoted in Kitab Allah wa Ahl al-Bayt fi Hadith Thaqalayn.

30.- Al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa, p. 150, Makitbah al-Qahireh (Egypt).

31.- Qayat al-Maram, vol. 2, p. 304 and 367.

32.- Fara’id al-Simtayn, p. 312, vol. 1, the institute of al-Mahmoodi lil-Tiba’a wa al-Nashr, Beirut. Ismail Pasha in his Izah al-Maknoon, p. 182, vol. 4, Dar al-Fikr says, “Fara’id al-Simtayn which deals with the outstanding merits of al-Murtida (Imam Ali (p.b.u.h.), al-Batool, (Hazarat Fatimah Zahra (S.A.), Imam al-Hasan and Imam al-Husain, peace be on them by Abdillah ibn Ibrahim ibn Sa’d al-Deen Mohammad ibn Abi Bark ibn Mohammad ibn Hamoyeh al-Jowayani; He finished it in 716.

33.- On page 65 of his al-Mo’jam al-Mukhtas bil Mohaddtheen, Moktabat al-Sideeq, Ta’if, Dhahabi says, “Ibrahim ibn Mohammad …is a great imam, traditionist, Sheikh of Sheikhs, who was born in 644 A.H. and died in Khorasan in 722 A.H.”.

On page 67, volume 1 of al-Durar al-Kamineh Ibn Hajar says: He attended hadith lectures of (certain) professors in Hilla and Tabriz, and specially favoured it. He was a religious, dignified and good-looking man who recited the Qur’an well.

34.- Kamal al-Deen, p. 274.

35.- Kamal al-Deen, p.253.

36.- Usool al-Kafi, vol. 1, p. 217.

Chapter 4: Imamate As Envisaged in the Verse of Wilayah

﴿ إِنَّما وَلِيُّكُمُ اللَّهُ وَ رَسُولُهُ وَ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلاةَ وَ يُؤْتُونَ الزَّكاةَ وَ هُمْ راكِعُونَ ﴾

“Only Allah is your wali and His Apostle and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor rate while they bow ”. (5:55)

One of the strong arguments advanced by Imamiyyah Shi’ites in support of Imamate and wilayah of Ali (as) is the Qur’anic verse ofwilayah .

In order to confirm the idea presented in the Qur’anic verse about the word “wali ”, we have to prove the following:

1. The word “انما” meaning “only”, indicates restriction.

2. “Wali ”, in the stated verse, means most worthy of possession of authority and being a guardian.

3. The phrase “bow down ” refers to a ritual movement while praying, not to a humbleness and humility.

4. It is certain that this Qur’anic verse refers to the occasion when the Commander of the Faithful, Ali (as), paidZakat , to the poor for the sake of God, while he was bowing in praying.

Here, we seek to prove the aforementioned points and to finally answer the questions posed in regard to this Qur’anic verse.

The Use of “انما” (only) for Restriction

Arabic lexicographers say that, the word انما indicates restriction:

a) Ibn Manzur says, “A combination of ان, and ما that, indicates specification. An instance for this the Qur’anic verse:

﴿إِنَّمَا الصَّدَقاتُ لِلْفُقَراءِ وَ الْمَساكِينِ﴾

Alms are only for the poor and the needy ” (9:160)

In which انما shows that the following command includes the mentioned group and excludes others.1

b) Jawhari, another lexicographer, says something similar to that.2

c) Firoozabadi says, “Like أنما, the word إنما indicates restriction and both are found in the Qur’anic verse:

﴿قُلْ إِنَّما يُوحى إِلَيَّ أَنَّما إِلهُكُمْ إِلهٌ واحِدٌ فَهَلْ أَنْتُمْ مُسْلِمُونَ﴾

Say:

It is only revealed to me that your God is one will you then submit? ” (21:108)

Contains both انما and انما.3

d) Ibn Hisham says the same thing.4

Therefore, there is no doubt that “انما” is used to indicate restriction. It may also be used to indicate something else. If there is a contextual clue, which is a figurative use of the word.

An Investigation into the Meaning of “Wali”

The word “ولی” is a derivative of “وَلی” meaning “madewali ”, and “ولایه” meaning “guardianship” a word that has various meanings. An investigation into the meanings, however, shows that it originally means “guardian”, “one who has preference over others”, and “possessor of free will”.

a) Ibn Manzur’sLisan al-Arab says the following: “Wali means an orphan’s guardian who manages the orphan’s affairs, and provides him or her. Thewali (guardian) of a woman is the one who supervises her marriage contact.

It has been reported that if a woman gets married without the permission of hermuwalli , her marriage contract will be nil and void. Yet another report contains the word “her wali ” rather than hermuwalli , which means someone who has full authority”.5

b) Fayoomi says in hisal-Misbah al-Muneer ,6 “the wordwali, pronounced in the same way asfa-eel فعيل, has the meaning of agent, as in the holy Qur’anic verse

“Allah is the guardian of those who believe ” (2:257)

c) Ibn Faris has said, “The person who is delegated to manage someone’s affairs is his or herwali . This word is sometimes used to mean the one who sets a slave free, the freed slave, the cousin, the helper, or the friend”.

From what this great lexicographer says, it can be understood that such meanings as “helper” and “friend” are not the real meanings ofwali , but sometimes it can be used figuratively.

To definewali , dictionaries7 usually the following example: “The one who manages someone’s affairs is hiswali, (guardian).”

It can thus be understood thatwali conventionally means “one who has free will and authority”; this is confirmed by the Qur’anic verses mentioned below:8

A Few Basic Points to Notice

A) Dictionaries usually give the various meaning of a word. This does not mean that each word has a real meaning According to linguists’ view the idea that each lexical item has many real meanings opposes the principle rule (of language).

For example: Jamal al-Deen ibn Hisham al-Misri, a leading Sunni scholar of (Arabic), grammar and literature, and author ofMugni al-Labib , comments on the way some grammar scholars interpret the Qur’anic verse:

﴿إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَ مَلائِكَتَهُ يُصَلُّونَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ... ﴾

Surely Allah and His angels bless the Prophet ”, (33:56)

Has not been mentioned explicitly. These scholars maintain that the word angles in the Qur’anic statement is a predicate. (In answer to them) he says, “There are reasons to believe that what these people say is far from reality

first, on the basis of their claim the word صلاه “blessing” must have various meanings, and this opposes the linguistic principle so that some have denied (such possibility) and those who have not, prefer to consider it a figurative usage.

Firoozabadi, a lexicographer, has written in a book on “calling for (divine) blessing on the Prophet”, and investigated the Qur’anic verse, citing what ibn Hisham has said in this regard.9

“Surely Allah and His angels bless the Prophet… ”

Accordingly, as regards the meaning of the wordwilayah , which has several meanings, it definitely means “guardianship” and “authority” whereas “friendship” and “helper” are excluded from the province of the meaning. Thus, whenever the word “wali ” is used without a contextual clue, it denotes “guardian” and “authority”.

B) Some lexicographers assume that the root “w-l-i ” means closeness and some commentators take the lexicographers’ view for granted. It should, however, be noticed that:

1) Such view is based merely on guessing; not on reasoning.

2) What contributes to understanding the real meaning of a lexical item is the time in which it is used. There is no doubt that most often the word “wali ” does not mean “closeness”, but in some cases when there is a contextual clue, it does as in the phrase المطر الولی. This phrase means: a second rain close in time to the first one.

Even if we assume that the word “wali ” formerly meant “closeness ”, but now it does not because it is obsolete.

C) Certain lexicographers, for instance, ibn al-Atheer in hisal-Nihayah , and ibn Manzur in hisLisan al-Arab , say at the outset of their discussion of the meaning ofwali that it is one of the names of God, and it means “helper ”, and it can mean “Administrator of the universe ”.

This, however, is not true because the wordwali comes from the root which is pronounced likefa -eel. Were it mean “helper ”, it would convey this idea both when it is a root and derivative provided that it gives the meaning of a subject.

It should be added that neither of the two has a proof, besides, the word that is pronounced likefa-eel is a verb-likeadjective , implying a constancy (in the attributes it refers to), whereasfa-eel , denotes an occurrence, and each of them oppose the other.

So, the wordwali which is considered as a name of God means possessor of authority and administrator of the affairs of the world. However, the two above mentioned lexicographers, give their own opinion about the meaning, using the wordqeel which means “it is said that”.

D) The wordwali has, in many Qur’anic verses, been juxtaposed withNaseer (helper), as in the Qur’anic verse,

“…and that besides Allah, you have no guardian or helper ” (2:107)

. Ifnaseer was one of the meanings of the wordwali , it would not be used next towali . Semantically, the two words differ from each other.

E) On the basis of many Qur’anic verses such as

﴿ما لَكُمْ مِنْ وَلايَتِهِمْ مِنْ شَيْ‏ءٍ﴾

“Not yours is their guardianship” , (8:72)

Some people have takenwali , andwilayah, to indicate “help” and “assistance”, whereas (wilayah ) could mean “guardian with giving assistance”. The (actual meaning of)wilayah is not “assistance” because assistance is part of (the responsibility of)wilayah. The only sense ofwilayah in the above mentioned verse is guardianship and (giving) assistance is observed, too.

We can thus conclude that “guardianship and authority” are the only meanings forwali in the mentioned Qur’anic verse.

Besides, the verse contains a definite clue to indicate that it does not mean “friend” and “helper”. This will be explained in the forthcoming pages.

The Meaning of Ruku’

Ruku’ literally means bowing down. This word is also used to mean a certain ritual act when we perform our prayers.10

Zubaydi says in hisTaj al-Aroos ,11 “The phraseraka’a al-Rajul , ركع الرجل may mean that the person was once wealthy but is poor now”. Here, the word “bow down” is used figuratively. Thus, the real meaning ofruku ’ is “bowing down” in praying; but when it is used to indicate poverty or humbleness, it will be a figurative use and needs a contextual clue.

The Occasion of the Revelation of the Verse of Wilayah

According to many reports in Shi’ite and Sunni commentaries of the Qur’an, the holy verse ofwilayah - “Only Allah is your wali and His Apostle and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow ”- was revealed in favour of Ali ibn Abi Talib, God’s peace be on him. Below is a narrative related by Tha’alabi12 in hisTafseer 13 on the authority of Sunni leading commentators, and by Sheikh Tusi, a great Shi’ite commentator, in hisMajm’a al-Bayan 14:

“It is reported that Abayat ibn Rab’i said, ‘Abdullah ibn Abbas was sitting by the Zam Zam well (in the House of God) relatinghadith s from the Holy Prophet (saws). Then, a man with a turban on his head entered. Ibn Abbas began saying, ‘The Holy Prophet, may God bless him and his descendants said...’ and the man repeated (the same phrase, saying), ‘The Holy Prophet, may God bless him and his descendant said…

This statement was repeated (several times). Finally, ibn Abbas said to him, ‘For God’s sake tell us who you are.’ The man took his turban off and said, ‘I will introduce myself to those who do not know me. I am Jundub, the son of Junadah al-Badri, that is, Abu Dhar Ghifari. ‘I heard the Prophet (saws) and saw him say, ‘Ali (as) is the leader of those who do good and killer of those who disbelieve.

Whoever helps him will be helped (by God) and whoever abandons him will be abandoned (by God).’ As he said the first phrase Jundub pointed to his ears and said,’ May my ears become deaf if I am not telling you the

truth,’ and pointed to his eyes and said ‘May my eyes become blind if I am not telling you the truth”.

“The Jundub also said, ‘Once I performed the noon prayers in a mosque, behind the Prophet (saws) then, a beggar came in but no one attended to him. The beggar extended his hands towards the heaven and said, ‘O God, bear witness! Here, in the mosque of the Prophet of God (saws) I asked (to be given something), but no one attended to me.’

Ali (as), who was inruku’, saying his prayers gestured with his hand, inviting the beggar to take a ring which was on his little finger. The beggar stepped closer, and removed the ring from Ali’s (as) finger. This incident took place in the presence of the Prophet (saws).

“When the prayer finished, the Prophet (saws) extended his hand towards the heaven and said,

“My God! My brother Moses supplicated to you, and said: O my Lord! Expand my breast for me, and make my affair easy to me, and loose the knot from my tongue (that) they may understand my word; and give to me an aider from my family: Haroun, my brother” . (20:25-30)

There and then came a revelation (to Moses)

‘We will strengthen your arm with your brother, and We will give you both an authority’ (28:35)

‘O My God, I am Mohammad(saws), Thy Prophet and Thy Chosen one; expand my breast for me and make my affairs easy to me and give me an aider from my family, Ali (as), and back me up by him.’

“Abu Dhar continued ‘By God! No sooner had the Prophet (saws) finished his words than Gabriel descended and said: O Mohammad! Recite.’ The Prophet (saws) asked, ‘What should I recite?’ Gabriel said,‘Only Allah is your wali and His Apostle and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow ”.

There are many narratives that mention this specific reason for the revelation of Qur’anic verse. Some of thesehadith s will be cited later on, and some others will come on the page containing responses to ibn Taymiyyah’s objections.

When we come across thesehadith s it will become clear that the mentioned reason for the revelation of this Qur’anic verse is definite.

Questions and Answers on the Verse of Wilayah

In this section it is appropriate to answer the questions raised concerning the verse of “wilayah”.

Question One: Doesn’t the word “Wali”, in the verse, mean “friend”?

The Qur’anic verse in question comes in the same context as those verses that prohibit believers from taking the Jews and the Christians as theirwali . Inasmuch the wordwali means “helper” and “friend” in those verses, in this particular verse ofwilayah it must also mean helper or friend because these verses make them integrated with the other verses.

Given this, the verse means: your friends are only Allah and His Apostle and those believers who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate when they stand before God in humbleness.

Answer:

First: It is unsound to say that these verses are integrated with the verses preceding them because, as we already stated the reason for the revelation of this particular verse and on the basis of the elaboration that will follow the reason for the revelation of this verse is different. By “different” we mean that there is no relationship between the content and the subject matter of this verse and the content and subject matter of the other verses.

Without doubt the arrangement of the Qur’anic verses, which we usually read, differs from the order in which the verses were revealed. There are verses, such as those revealed in Mecca, that come in the final part of the Qur’an, and vice versa. For example the chapter “Baqara” is the second in the present order, whereas it was the first chapter revealed in Medina. The way the Qur’an is arranged does not correspond with the time the verses and chapters were revealed.

The verses and chapters of the Qur’an have been arranged under the supervision of the Prophet (saws). While determining the order of each verse and chapter, he considered the occasion and spiritual pertinence of the verses. Therefore, the difference between the present arrangement of the verses and the time of their revelation does not harm the contextual integrity.

Answer:

It is true that the present order of the verses was arranged under the Prophet’s supervision and there is a reason for locating every verse and chapter. There is no evidence to support the claim that the Prophet (saws) observed the wisest order, occasions and spiritual relations between the verses.

Thus, when there is solid evidence that a certain verse has been revealed after another, (we can say that) they make a structural whole but when a verse has been independently revealed or there is doubt about that, we cannot say that the two verses make a structural whole.

The Qur’anic verse in question has been independently revealed. Therefore, it is not contextually related to the previous verses.

Secondly, it is not certain thatwali , in the Qur’anic verse means “friend” or “helper”.

“O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians as wali, some of them act as walis for one another… ” (5:51)

Based on the previous discussions,wali in the above verse can also mean “guardian” and “authority”.

Third: If the word “wilayah ” in verse 55 of chapter 5 is taken to mean “friendship” and “assistance”, the content of the verse will contradict the reality, because the verse would mean “Only Allah and His apostle are your friends or helpers and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow”.

It is evident that the “friends” and “helpers” of those who believe are not only those who pay the poor-rate while they bow, but all believers are each other’s “helpers” and “friends”. If the word راكعون (they bow ) in the verse is interpreted to as “they humble themselves before God” it will be a

metaphorical usage. As we said before, the word “راكعون” means “bowing down (in prayers)”.

Thus, to claim that there is a contextual relationship between verse 51 of chapter 5 and those before it is groundless.

However, even if there is a contextual relationship between verse 51 of chapter 5 and the preceding ones, it will not have a negative influence on the meaning the verse wants to convey.

Question Two: That the verse has been revealed on the occasion of Ali’s paying the poor-rate while he was bowing down should be proved

Certain people express their doubt about the idea that the verse has been revealed on the occasion of Ali’s (as) paying the poor-rate while he was bowing down in prayers. Tha’alabi, one of those who have narrated the event, is not qualified enough to differentiate between sound and unsound reports. Great traditionists, such as al-Tabari, ibn Hatam and others have not mentioned such faked stories.

Answer:

A large number of books of hadith and Qur’an commentary written by Shi’ite and Sunni authors confirm this particular reason for the revelation of the verse: i.e. paying the poor rate by Ali (as) while he was bowing in prayers. Since These books are too many to mention here, we will mention some of them in the footnote.15

To call such an authentic report “a forged story” is an infuriating insult both to the Commander of the Faithful, Ali (as) and to the great traditionists who have narrated thishadith . Tha’alibi, whom this reckless critic considers “unable to distinguish between sound and unsoundhadiths ” is highly commended by Sunni scholars ofilm-Rijal . Let us see the view of two of them:

1. Dhahabi, a great Sunni scholar ofilm-al-Rijal , and a renownedhadith expert says about Tha’alabi: “He is an imam, who has learned the Qur’an by heart, an authority on the Qur’an commentary, a treasury of science, who was truthful and trustworthy and has a good insight in Arabic”.16

2. In hisSelection of the History of Nayshabour , Abd al-Ghafir Nayshaburi says, “Ahmad ibn Mohammad ibn Ibrahim who is well qualified in recitation of the Qur’an; a commentator (of the Qur’an), a preacher, a man of letters, a trustworthy one who has learned the Qur’an by heart, has written invaluable books of the Qur’an commentary containing various (lexical) meanings and allusions”. Then, he says, “Hishadith s are authentic and reliable”.17

Besides the fact that Tha’alabi is a trustworthy and great scholar, the incident of giving the ring by Ali (as) to the needy man can be found in manyhadith books of both Shi’ites and Sunnis, including Tabari and ibn Abi Hatem, who are among the critics about whom some say do not narrate such forged stories” have narrated it. It is appropriate here to quote these two scholars.

Ibn Katheer says, in hisCommentary :

“Ibn Abi Hatem said: Abu Sa’id al-Ashaj told us: al-Fazl ibn Dekeen Abu Na’im al-Ahwal told us: Musa ibn Qays informed us on the authority

of Salamat ibn Kuhyal, who said: Ali (as), gave his ring while he was bowing in prayer. Then (the following) verse was revealed,

“Only Allah is your wali and His Apostle and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow.” ’18

Also Ibn Jarir al-Tabari says in hisCommentary : Mohammad ibn al-Husain told us: ‘Ahmad ibn al-Mofazzal told us: Asbat related from al-Seddi to have said “Ali ibn Abi Talib (as) was in the mosque, in the position of bowing in prayer, and when a need person passed by, he gave him his ring”19

Question Three: Does the word انما only indicate restriction?

Fakhr al-Razi’s answer is no, and, in order to support his view, he cites this verse:

“The likeness of this world’s life is only as water which We send down from the cloud, then the herbage of the earth of which men and cattle eat grows luxuriantly thereby; until when the earth puts on its golden raiment and it becomes garnished, and its people think that they have power over it, Our command comes to it, by night or by day, so We render it as reaped seed-produce, as though it had not been in existence yesterday; thus do We make clear the communication for a people who reflect ” (10:24).

He says, “This is not the only parable for the life in this world, -there are other parables too. Therefore, the word انما (only ) in this verse, does not really indicate restriction.

Answer:

First: The word انما, meaning “only”, does indicate restriction, even in the verse Fakhr al-Razi has quoted (as an example in his attempt to justify his point). This is called,hasr , (exclusiveness) in Arabic. There are, however, two kinds ofhasr: real and relative the idea of the addressee in the latter, is omitted. For example, when someone says, “A certain person, (a), is standing”, and another one says “Only (b) is standing”, this means that the idea that someone other than “b” is standing is rendered null and void.

In the same way, the verse 24 in chapter 10 quoted above, wants to say that the life in this world is like (rain) water falling from the sky, causing the plants to grow and finally the plants’ wither which is an indication of annihilation and the end of life in this world. This means that the life in this world is not permanent.

Second: The word انما (only) that indicates restriction may not mean restriction, provided that there is a contextual clue. The wordonly is figuratively used in the mentioned verse and this cannot be a reason for using it in the cases where there is no contextual clue. Therefore, in the verse ofwilayah , the wordonly has been used in its real meaning i.e. to indicate restriction.

Question Four: Is referring to Ali (as) as “those who believe”- in the verse of wilayah- used figuratively?

If the phrase “those who believe ”- plural in meaning- is used to refer to Ali (as), then it has a figurative sense, and this cannot acceptable if there is no contextual clue.

Answer:

First: Based on Imamiyyah Shi’ite hadiths, the phrase “those who believe” does not to refer only to Ali (as). It also includes all infallible Imams (p.b.u.th.), who according to our traditions have the privilege of having given a needy person a ring when they were in prayer.20

Second: If we assume that the Qur’anic phrase wants to allude specifically to Ali (as), and that it is used figuratively, there arehadith s that explain the reasons for the revelation of the Qur’anic verse which serve as contextual clue.

Question Five: Did Ali (as) possess a ring to give in the cause of God?

It is quite known that Ali (as) himself was of little means, and did not own an expensive ring to give to a needy person.

Answer: Ali (as) was not poor. Traditions and history attest to the fact that he personally worked hard, planting palm trees and digging grooves, but he never amassed wealth; rather, he donated all his wealth in the cause of Allah.

Question Six: Is giving of the ring congruent with complete absorption in prayers?

When he performed ritual prayer, Ali (as) got totally absorbed in praying so that he did not hear others. How could he hear the needy person asking for help? How did he give the ring to the needy man?

Answer: Although, when he said his ritual prayer, Ali (as) paid no heed to what was going around him because he concentrated on praying, it is quite possible that God, the Mighty and High, who is capable of changing one’s condition, had turned Ali’s attention to the needy person so that he could give him something, a valuable act of worship which led to the revelation of the Qur’anic verse.

A number of the traditions about the occasion of the revelation of the verse we have already mentioned prove that Ali (as) did notice the beggar and as a result he gave the poor man poor-rate.

Question Seven: Does giving something during the prayer, invalidate it?

Giving of the ring harms the formal rules of ritual prayer, an act which can never be attributed to, Ali (as).

Answer:

What invalidates the (formal rules of) prayer is, according to Shi’ite and Sunni jurists, making katheer (major) moves. Minor gestures do not invalidate ritual prayer.

In a section under the title ofMinor moves in prayers , Abu Bakr Jassas discusses the Qur’anic verse in question in his book,Ahkam al-Qur’an ,21 and says ‘If the Qur’anic verse refers to the giving ofsadaka (poor-rate) while (the donor is) bowing down in prayers, this means that minor motions are permissible while performing ritual prayers.

There are reports about some of the minor moves made by the Prophet (saws) while he was performing his prayers, such as touching his beard, and

pointing to something and so on. These reports clearly show that it is permissible to give poor-rate while performing ritual prayer”.

In hisJami’ Ahkam al-Qur’an, 22 Qortubi quotes al-Tabari to have said, “This (event of) donation of ring by the Commander of the Faithful (as) indicates that slight moves do not invalidate ritual prayers. Consequently, giving a poor mansadaka (a donation in the cause of God) while performing prayers, does not invalidate the prayers”.

Question Eight: Can recommended Sadaka be called Zakat?

Fakhr al-Razi says that the termZaka t, in the Qur’anic verse means obligatoryZakat (alms), not voluntarysadaka (poor-rate or charity), as is understood from God’s oft-repeated “… اتوالزكوه meaning pay the alms”, an imperative form making it obligatory.

Now that the term “Zakat ” is considered an “obligatory act”, if Ali (as) had given an obligatory alms when he was performing ritual prayers, he would have delayed, an obligatory act, which most scholars consider a sin. No one, however, can attribute such a thing to Ali (as).

If (on the other hand) the termZakat is taken to mean “recommended poor-rate”, it will contradict the principle because it is understood from the (Qur’anic verse) “pay the alms ” that anysadaka that is calledZakat is obligatory.

Answer:

First: There is no doubt that “Zakat” in the verse means “recommended poor-rate”. The hadiths about the occasion of the revelation of the stated Qur’anic verse, emphasize this fact. It is not correct to assume that since the verse “pay the alms” refers to “obligatory Zakat” then any kind of “Zakat” must be obligatory. What is obligatory in the verse “and pay the alms” is the imperative “pay”, whereas the word “Zakat” has a general sense.

In fact “Zakat ”, regardless of any contextual clue, is divided into two kinds: obligatory and recommended. Thus, “wujub (obligation)” or “istihbab (being recommended)” falls outside the province of denotation. This view is supported by Shi’ite and Sunni jurists, who divideZakat into two kinds: “obligatory” andmandub (recommended)”.

Therefore, the assumption that anything (paid as)Zakat must be “obligatory contradicts what we have stated”.

Second: The Qur’anic verse does not contain the imperative verb “pay ”, and the sentence: “(they )pay the poor-rate ” is a statement. Thatsadaka (poor-rate), in the Qur’anic verse is “recommended”, not “obligatory” is confirmed by some Sunni jurists.

For example, in hisAhkam al-Qur’an , Jassas says: the Qur’anic phrase “they pay the poor rate while they bow ” shows that recommendedsadaka is calledZakat because Ali (as) gave his ring as “recommendedsadaka ”.

Zakat in the Qur’anic verse “and whatever you give in charity, desiring Allah’s pleasure it is these (persons )that shall get manifold ” covers both obligatory and recommendedsadaka (poor-rate). Similarly, the wordsalat (ritual prayer) includes both prescribed andmustahab (recommended) ritual prayers”23

Question Nine: Is giving poor-due while bowing in prayer a highly praised act?

If by bowing down it is meant ruku which is part of ritual prayers, (we should say that) giving things, in this particular part of prayer does not deserve praise, because there is no difference between giving something in this particular part and in any other part.

Answer:

Concerning the incident of giving Zakat by Ali (as), the Qur’anic verse refers to bowing down not because it is highly praised to give zakat in this particular part of prayer, but because it is the time that the needy man asked Ali (as) for something.

In other words, it is merely an external proposition: there is nothing particular in the termruku ’, but it is the act of worship done by Ali (as) that deserves praise. If Ali (as) had not given the ring, the needy man would have left the mosque disappointed.

Question Ten: Does the content of this verse contradict that of the verse before it?

Fakhr al-Razi says, “If this Qur’anic verse is taken as a proof of the Imamate of Ali (as), the verse will then contradict the verse preceding it because the latter indicates the legitimacy of the caliphate of Abu Bakr.

Answer: The verse preceding the verse of wilayah in the Qur’an never indicates the legitimacy of the caliphate of Abu Bakr. The verse says

“O you who believe! Whoever from among you turns back from his religion, then Allah will bring a people, He shall love them and they shall love Him, lowly before the believers, mighty against the unbelievers; they shall strive in Allah’s way and shall not fear the censure of any censurer; this is Allah’s grace. He gives it to whom He pleases, and Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing ”24.

Fakhr al-Razi, however, says that the above verse points to the legitimacy of Abu Bakr’s caliphate because God, the Mighty and High, has told the believers that if they turn back from their religion, He will bring a group of people who have the attributes mentioned in the verse to fight them.

Fakhr al-Razi then says that after the death of the Prophet (saws) Abu Bakr was the only person who fought against the apostates. Because this Qur’anic verse is taken to be in favour of Abu Bakr, it is an indication of the legitimacy of his caliphate, too.

b) In order to support his argument of the legitimacy of Abu Bakr’s caliphate, Fakhr al-Razi adds a phrase of his own: “fighting against apostates”. The verse refers to a group with certain attributes including readiness “to strive in Allah’s way”. The verse has not said that “these people will fight the apostates”.

Similar to the content of this verse is found in some other verses:

1. “… if these disbelieve in it We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it ”. 25

2. “… and if you turn back He will bring in your place another people, then they will not be like you ”. 26

3. “If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm ”. 27

The content of the Qur’anic verse (in question) is similar to that of the above mentioned verses. In the verse Fakhr al-Razi has cited, there is no mention of a group of people who will fight the apostates.

Question Eleven: Doesn’t the restriction in the verse invalidate the Imamate of the Infallible Imams?

If we say that the Qur’anic verse indicates the Imamate of Ali (as), this will oppose the doctrine of Imamiyyah School of thought just as it contradicts the Sunni doctrine, because the Shi’ites’ do not believe only in Ali’s Imamate, but in the imamate of other eleven Imams, as well.

Answer:

First: On the basis of the solid evidence already presented, the term wilayah means “divine authority and guardianship” and “bowing down” means a bowing down in prayer. It has become clear that the word only, indicating restriction, shows that hasr (restriction) in the verse is relative, not real, because besides the Prophet and the Imams there are other “guardians” such as jurists, rulers, the judges, fathers, grandparents, and executors.

If we takehasr to have real meaning, the verse will negate the authority of all thesewalis (guardians), but such is not the case. This is a clue indicating that the restriction in the Qur’anic verse is (functionally) relative, meaning authority, guardianship and succession of the Commander of the Faithful (as) after the Prophet (saws). Therefore, this is not incompatible with the idea of the Imamate of the other (infallible) Imams.

Second: Based on the traditions inhadith sources of both Imamiyyah Shi’ites and Sunnis, the Qur’anic phrase “those who believe ”28 does not refer only to Ali (as), because all the (infallible) Imams have had the privilege of givingZakat while they were bowing down in their prayers just as Imam Ali (as) did. Thus, the Qur’anic verse has shown, from the outset, that Imamate is granted to True Imams only.

Question Twelve: Did Ali (as) have the office of guardianship in the lifetime of the Prophet (saws)?

If the Qur’anic verse provides evidence for the Imamate of Ali (as), Ali (as) must to have had such a rank during the lifetime of the Prophet (saws but this was not the case.

Answer:

First: Multitude evidence prove that Ali (as) also had authority in the lifetime of the Prophet (saws) and whenever the Prophet (saws) was not present (in the town) he appointed Ali (as) as his deputy. The tradition of Manzilah clearly shows that Ali (as) held all the ranks and positions the Prophet had, just as Aaron had all the ranks held by Moses, peace be on him.

When Prophet Moses wanted to leave for Mount Sinai, he said to his brother Aaron “Be my deputy ". As Sunni scholars hold, Aaron’s succeeding

Moses is not limited to the time when Moses was staying in Mount Sinai.29 Therefore Ali (as) is the Prophet’s successor.

Second: If there is no evidence to prove Ali’s authority in the lifetime of the Prophet (saws), the verse ofWilayah (certainly) indicates his authority from the moment of the Prophet’s death.

Question Thirteen: Considering the verse of Wilayah, can we consider Ali (as) as the fourth caliph?

Assuming that the Holy Qur’anic verse denotes, the appointment of Ali (as) to the rank of Imamate, it does not negate the caliphate of the three caliphs before him, because on the basis of the consensus and consultative assembly, we accept the caliphate of the caliphs who came before Ali (as) first and then observe the verse ofwilayah which indicates his Imamate.

Answer:

First: The consultative assembly and consensus can be relied on only if they are credible. Concerning Sunnis’ claim, the Imamiyyah Shi’ites do not consider them satisfactory.

Second: The consultative assembly and the consensus of opinion can be based on if there is nonass (divine decree). When there is an explicitnass neither the consultative assembly nor consensus of opinion is rendered effective, as God, may His majesty be extolled, has said,

“And it behoves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His apostle have decided a matter ”. (33:36)

Question Fourteen: Did Ali (as) invoke the verse of Wilayah to support his claim?

If the holy verse ofwilayah indicates Ali’s Imamate, why didn’t he invoke it to prove his claim although, for example, on the day of the consultative assembly (see p. 31) and on many other occasions he made known many of his merits to the people he met?

Answer:

Some great Shi’ite and Sunni traditionists have reported the occasions when Ali (as) introduced arguments for his Imamate including the verse of wilayah.

For example, Ibrahim ibn Mohammad Jowayni, in hisFara’id al-Simtayn 30 and ibn Babaway, a Shi’ite scholar, in hisKamal al-Deen 31, have reported that during the caliphate of Uthman, when a group of the Companions, Emigrants andAnsar were gathering in the Prophet’s mosque, Ali (as) reminded them of his merits and excellence, and of the verse ofwilayah .

We have mentioned this long tradition at the end of the discussion on the verse ofAulu al-Amr . The readers may refer to the last part of the commentary of this verse in order to have a clear idea about the personality of the author ofFara’id al-Simtayn.

Divine Justice (Adl)

وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ {54}

"And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners.” (Aale ‘Imran, 3:54)

Question 4

Q.4: What is the difference between planning (Makr) of God and the planning (Makr) of a man?

A: Makr of man consists of deceit and cheating to which a fellow resorts with a view to save himself or to overcome others or to fulfill his corrupt wishes.

But the Makr of Almighty Allah is a form of punishment, revenge and anger against man 's evil deed. This chastisement is kept secret from the man. The sinner does not know that he is under God's anger. For example, respiting the infidels and transgressors, so that their disobedience may multiply thereby making them liable to a greater chastisement in the Hereafter:

إِنَّمَا نُمْلِي لَهُمْ لِيَزْدَادُوا إِثْمًا ۚ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُهِينٌ

"We grant them respite only that they may add to their sins ...” (Aale ‘lmran, 3: 178)

Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) said:

"By God, God did not chastise them more severely than by respiting them (so that their sins may increase and so also their punishment consequently)."

Also it is like 'gradual arrest ' (lstidraaj), in which whenever a person indulges in a new sin, Allah grants him a new favor, so that by remaining occupied in that blessing, the sinner may not realize that he is disobedient to Allah and that he may not repent for his sins.

It is narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.): "When a servant is under the kindness and mercy of Allah and when Allah desires good for him, He puts him into trouble after he has committed a sin so that he may repent and be reminded of Allah and that he may purify himself of that sin. On the other hand, when Allah is enraged with a man, He bestows him a new blessing as a result of which he forgets repentance and continues to sin. This is what the Almighty Allah says:

وَالَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا سَنَسْتَدْرِجُهُمْ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

"We draw them near (to destruction) by degrees from whence they know not. "(Al Araaf 7: 182)1

As regards calling this kind of divine punishment a Makr it is that the Makr of men, is both selfish and oppressive. This chastisement from Allah is by way of recompense based on justice. It is a similar action, but different in its aim. Moreover, Makr of men, due to weakness and lack of encompassing is mostly a failure, whereas a similar Makr from Allah is perfect in power and effectiveness, which fulfils its aim. That is why He Himself says:

وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ

''And Allah is the best of planners." (Aale ’lmran, 3:54)

اللَّهُ أَسْرَعُ مَكْرً

"Allah is quicker to plan ...” (Yunus, l0:21)

وَأُمْلِي لَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّ كَيْدِي مَتِينٌ

"And I grant them respite; surely My scheme is effective.” (Al A’araaf, 7: 183)

Or since divine punishment is effective against Makr of man it is true to call it as a Makr from Allah. For example:

وَجَزَاءُ سَيِّئَةٍ سَيِّئَةٌ مِثْلُهَ

"And the recompense of evil is punishment like it..." (Ash-Shura 42:40)

In fact the compensation of an evil is, in fact, not an evil as it based on justice, but it is all right to call it as such. Just as it is correct to say that the consequence of evil is evil and likewise to say that the recompense of a person's Makr is a Makr against him. However, divine Makr is never condemnable. On the contrary it is justice and that is why the Makr of man is called a bad Makr:

ۚ وَلَا يَحِيقُ الْمَكْرُ السَّيِّئُ إِلَّا بِأَهْلِهِ ۚ

"..and the evil plans shall not beset any save the authors of it..."(Al Fatir, 35:42)

We should know that planning (Makr) and excuse (Heela) is in the meaning of a remedy and planning through hidden means for getting a benefit or to avoid harm. It is of two kinds:

The good planning, which is from the Merciful God and bad and devilish planning.

1. The good planning is that which is through permissible means and which is for getting permissible gain, in which one plans correctly and rightly. And it is to save oneself or others from harms and to be protected from oppression. In short, a remedial measure or planning for rightful aims is all right from both the viewpoint of wisdom and as well as Shariat laws. It is both desirable and meritorious.

2. Bad planning (Makr) is that which is done for devilish aims. For example: to plan to make money through unlawful means or to harm others or to obstruct the truth.

This is with regard to Makr of man, but Makr of God, is doubtlessly, the correct planning, which is both right and praiseworthy as it foils the devilish designs of unjust. It returns to them the losses of their Makr. It enables religion and its supporters to win over the enemies.

Another point is that divine planning is by way of retribution and furthermore it is against the designs of sinners and unjust and is a plan against their plans.

To understand the meaning of divine Makr look at the following verses of the Holy Quran:

وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ

"And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners.” (Aal ‘Imran, 3:54)

It means: Jews and enemies of Christ planned to eliminate him and his law. In other words, they plotted and through devilish means, tried to obstruct the divine call. God also then made a plan against them to save the life of Christ and to protect his Shariat. He took remedial measures and foiled their plans and, of course, God is the best solution for those who inquire.

A person named Yahuda was a companion of His Eminence, Isa Masih (a.s.), but he was a hypocrite and a spy. At night when Isa (a.s.) was alone and none of his companions were with him, Yahuda informed the Jews of his whereabouts.

It was a dark night. The Jews told Yahuda: "Go in and bring out Isa so that we may kill him." When Yahuda arrived, Almighty Allah saved Isa (a.s.) and Yahuda could not see him; so he returned to the Jews while Allah had made his face exactly like that of Isa (a.s.). They apprehended him and when he cried that he is Yahuda and not Isa, they did not pay any heed to him and they finally killed him. Some have said that from the very beginning, Yahuda resembled Isa (a.s.) and that during that night he was apprehended and executed by the Jews.

وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ وَيَمْكُرُونَ وَيَمْكُرُ اللَّهُ

"And when those who disbelieved devised plans against you that they might confine you or slay you or drive you away; and they devised plans and Allah too had arranged a plan; and Allah is the best of planners.” (Al Anfaal, 8:30)

It means that the leaders of Quraish gathered in Darun Nadwah to plot about driving away Prophet Muhammad (s.a:w.s.). Abul Bakhtari suggested: "He should be tightly chained and imprisoned in a closed room; and food and water be sent to him daily until he dies therein."

Shaykh Najdi said: "This is a defective suggestion, because Bani Hashim and their supporters would free him."

Hisham bin Amr said: "'Muhammad must be tied to the back of a camel, which should be driven out to the desert, so that he may starve to death."

Shaykh Najdi said: "He would certainly meet Arab tribals on the way and he would attract them; and they will save him. Finally he would join hands with them to fight us."

Abu Jahl said: "In my opinion, we should recruit a person from every clan so that all of them jointly kill him and thus his blood money may be shared by various different clans. In this way, Bani Hashim will not be able to fight all the tribes and consequently be obliged to accept blood money."

Shaykh Najdi said: "This is the best option." Some have said that it was the opinion of Shaykh Najdi from the very beginning and that all had agreed to it later.

So Abu Jahl recruited one person from every family. They resolved that one night all of them should gather outside the house of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) and then assassinate him jointly.

Jibraeel (a.s.) informed the Messenger of Allah about the planning of Quraish and told him that it is the command of Allah that he should leave Mecca. So the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) told Amirul Momineen (a.s.): "Remain in my place and sleep in my bed so that the Quraish may not find it vacant and follow me." Then he went out of his house to the cave of Thawr.

The Quraish sent a spy to his house who came back to inform them that Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) was in his house; so they surrounded the house that night. At dawn, they finally entered the house fully armed to eliminate the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) but Amirul Momineen (a.s.) arose from the bed and demanded: "'What do you want?"

They replied: "We want Muhammad, where is he?" Ali (a.s.) replied: "I am not a watchman over him." They turned back from there and with the help of an expert tracker reached the cave of Thawr. But by divine command, spiders weaved webs at the mouth of that cave so thickly that, seeing it, the Quraish remarked: "Had Muhammad entered this cave, these webs would have been destroyed. Therefore it is clear that he has not entered it." So they returned from there. Three days later, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) migrated to Medina.

The above incident well explains what the Makr of polytheists of Mecca meant and that it was a devilish and oppressive Makr and that the Makr of Allah was by way of retribution and that it was totally just.

Question 5

Q. 5. Kindly explain the following tradition with examples:

‘‘Neither, fatalism nor free will,· it is a matter between the two extremes2

A: No fatalism means there is no force or compulsion, whereby man may, in his good or bad deeds, be absolutely helpless like a mere instrument of the will of God; that he may not have any power or choice. Falseness of belief in fatalism is one of the self-evident truths, because every sensible person, by conscience knows that he is having a free will and that his voluntary deeds are not like trembling etc. which is involuntarily. Therefore Muhaqqiq Qummi in his Kitabe Qawanin writes:

"Even if the fatalists bring thousands of arguments in favor of fatalism, they are proved baseless and false before self-evident things."

Moreover, this fatalism essentially falsifies the theory of reward and punishment in the Hereafter because, one who is helpless in the matter of obedience or disobedience (good or bad deeds), is logically not entitled to any reward or punishment. He does not deserve either to be praised or criticized even in this world. The fact is that if one commits a bad deed, all wise people consider him guilty and liable to criticism and punishment. No one considers him helpless.

Free will is also not possible as it would mean that man is able to do everything he desires; that he has full and total authority and ability to do whatever he wants in every matter. This belief is also false according to conscience, like the falsity of fatalism, because every sane person has experience that in many matters, he desired something, but it was not achieved due to some hindrance between his wish and the deed desired by him. He failed to do what he wanted to. Sometimes he even faces the exact opposite of his wish.

Therefore Amirul Momineen (a.s.) is reported to have said: "I recognized God through the failure of desires and inability to achieve wanted things."3 Is there any sane person who considers himself able to do whatever he wants? He knows very well that:

"Neither his profit nor his loss nor his death nor his life nor his rising is in his control."4

Also, the requisite of this belief of Free will adopted by the Mutazali is that they believe in 'associates' of Allah, because when they believe that man has absolute power to do whatever he desires, they consider themselves to have the rank of the Almighty Allah (Who alone is All-Powerful with absolute authority over everything). Some of the words of the Mutazalieven negate God's power vis a vis man 's.

"'But it is a matter between two matters." Man is neither totally without freedom of choice about what he likes nor does he has absolute power to do everything he desires. On the contrary, in all voluntary affairs, he requires the will of God to be in favor of his desired deed.

Otherwise what he wants to do will not be done. Likewise, he also requires the will of God in every affair. Also in all good deeds, people are in need of the grace of God. Also evil and sinful deeds of disobedience are due to the allowance granted by God. Of course, both the grace and allowance depend on the wish of man. That is why Amirul Momineen (a.s.) said in reply to a person's question about the meaning of: "There is no power or might except by Allah," that:

"There is no power in us in the matter of disobeying God, except under the allowance of God. Likewise we don't have any ability in performing good deeds except with the assistance of Allah."

In another tradition, he said:

“Good is by the grace of God and evil is due to the allowance granted by God."

Question 6

Q.6: Perhaps there are some people in Australia, Africa or America who have never even heard about Islam or about its rules and regulations. What their position will be after death?

A: Indeed such people will not be chastised after their death. They will not be questioned. From the viewpoint of logic and Islamic law they do not attract divine anger and punishment.

It is common sense that holding them responsible would be against Divine Justice, as arguments have not been exhausted for them. As regards the divine law, it is mentioned in Quran that:

إِلَّا الْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالنِّسَاءِ وَالْوِلْدَانِ لَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ حِيلَةً وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ سَبِيلًا

فَأُولَٰئِكَ عَسَى اللَّهُ أَنْ يَعْفُوَ عَنْهُمْ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًا

"Except the weak from among the men and the children who have neither in their power the means nor can they find a way (to escape); so these, it may be, Allah will pardon them, and Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving. " (An-Nisa, 4:98,99)

It is mentioned in Kifayatul Muwahhideen: The 'weak ' may include men and women who lack intelligence and arguments might not have been presented and exhausted for them.5

Such people might not have known anything about Islam and faith or may not have the means or power to get such information. Perhaps they are silly, mad, deaf or dumb and those who lived in the days of ignorance and died therein. In other words all those are 'weak' for whom arguments have not been exhausted.

Infidels are those, who during their lives, did not cultivate faith in God and Judgment Day and died in a state of disbelief. Transgressors are sinners and oppressors; they are unjust people, who committed evil deeds and who died without repenting. Punishment to them after their death depends upon their defaults. If they were helpless, they will not be chastised and if they were defaulters, their punishment will be in accordance with their faults.

Here helplessness is in the meaning of falling short. For example, a person is only one meter tall and his food or medicine is out of his reach. If he dies, he will not be punished after death. But if one is able to take the food or medicine, but keeps sitting and consequently dies. Such a person is indeed a defaulter and hence responsible; and will be punished for committing suicide.6

Therefore those who, due to lack of intelligence could not get faith in God, the Hereafter and other true beliefs and die in that state of ignorance, are weak and not liable to divine punishment and so also those to whom true beliefs never reached till the end of their lives, or if reached, they could not find a way to obtain them and thus were really disabled. In other words, all those who were truly weak and who did not make a default will not be punished.

Transgressors are those who commit sins whose evil and unlawfulness is known to them through natural human sense like killing someone without a cause and oppressing others or being excessive to others; such people are not weak, on the contrary they are defaulters. Thus, a disbeliever who is weak from the viewpoint of his infidelity - if he kills someone wrongfully - after his death he will not be punished for his infidelity due to his inability to know the truth. But he will, anyhow, be chastised for manslaughter. It is so because with regard to his faith, he can say: I had no way of finding the true faith. But from the viewpoint of manslaughter, he cannot say: I did not know that it was an offence. Though he had not heard the commandments of God and religion, his nature and common sense has exhausted the argument for him.

As regards sins proved from the viewpoint of religion, like missing or giving up of prayers and fasts etc.; if he was really helpless, as mentioned earlier in detail, he will not be questioned and punished.

Question 7

Q.7: It is hard for common sense to understand the verse of the Holy Quran which says:

يُضِلُّ اللَّهُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَيَهْدِي مَنْ يَشَاءُ ۚ

"Thus does Allah make err whom He pleases ...” (Al-Muddaththir, 74:31)

Please explain in detail.

A: This holy verse carries several meanings:

One is regarding knowledge about the Almighty Allah's authority over guidance and misguidance for anyone whom He wishes and that He is able to draw him to good or evil willy-nilly, but since withdrawal of free will is against Divine wisdom, He does not do so, because if He does so, one cannot be either rewarded or punished. Therefore the verse only informs us about God's ability and it does not mean that he really takes this step.

Another reason is that the meaning of guidance in this verse is not showing of the way as the same has already been conveyed to all responsible beings through prophets and Imams (a.s.). Similarly the meaning of guidance here is also not the attaining of the aim without free will or intention of man, because it too negates ones being entitled to reward or punishment.

Hence what is meant by guidance and misguidance in this verse is divine sense (Taufeeq) or abandoning (Khizlaan). Taufeeq means that the Almighty Allah pays special attention to His servant and makes the path of good easy for him thereby making him inclined to good and by increasing his desire to do good. He provides for him the means, which help him succeed and does not withhold from him means which can keep him away from sinning.

The perfect kind of such guidance is that by which God makes His servant taste the sweetness of good and the bitterness of evil. It i s obvious that such guidance, which facilitates the path of success, does not conflict with or does not negate man's free will. Therefore the meaning of this verse is: God sheds His favor on His servant by providing him with all the means of success to whoever He wants and deprives those He wants of His favors and leaving such a person to himself (to do whatever he likes).

But it should be clear that the will of Allah is not random; it is in accordance with the entitlement of man to get guidance or misguidance. Man makes himself eligible of God's favor by following and accepting the call of the divine prophets.

وَالَّذِينَ اهْتَدَوْا زَادَهُمْ هُدًى وَآتَاهُمْ تَقْوَاهُمْ

"And (as for) those who follow the right direction, He increases them in guidance and gives them their guarding (against evil).,,” (Muhammad, 47: 17)

Since guidance and good sense (Taufeeq) of God has stages, when God grants His favor and the servant accepts it thankfully, he becomes entitled to a higher rank. Likewise it is also possible that a man by his inclination to evil may make himself eligible for misguidance and deprivation.

Other interpretations of this verse are also there, but for now this should suffice.

Question 8

Q.8: The Satan was a monotheist and now also he is a monotheist How then would this verse not apply to him?

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَغْفِرُ أَنْ يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَٰلِكَ لِمَنْ يَشَاءُ ۚ وَمَنْ يُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا

"Surely Allah does not forgive that anything should be associated with Him, and He forgives what is besides this to whom He pleases ..." (An- Nisa, 4: 1 16)

A: It is true that Satan was not a polytheist in the beginning, because polytheism means to take someone as a partner of God in His creation, obedience or worship. Such polytheism was not there in the devil; but disbelief is worse than polytheism, because it is to give up the obedience of Almighty Allah due to enmity or ego; and according to Quran, Satan was a disbeliever, which is worse than being a polytheist.

أَبَىٰ وَاسْتَكْبَرَ وَكَانَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ

"…He refused and he was proud, and he was one of the unbelievers." (Al Baqarah, 2:34)

And in Al-Kafi it is narrated from Zurarah that Imam Baqir (a.s.) said: By Allah, disbelief is older than polytheism and so also dirtier and more serious. Then the Imam recalled the disbelief of lblis when Allah ordered him to prostrate before Adam, but he disobeyed.7 Thus infidelity is graver than polytheism.

Imam Sadiq (a.s.) was asked which of the two: disbelief and polytheism is older? He replied that disbelief is older, because Iblis was the first to become a disbeliever and his disbelief was not like polytheism, because he did not invite others to worship anyone other than God and, in fact, thereafter he extended such an invitation and became a polytheist.8

It is clear from the tradition that Satan is both a disbeliever as well as a polytheist, but his disbelief is due to the fact that he disobeyed God's command and in other words denied the Lordship, divinity and His right to be obeyed and worshipped. In a tradition of Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) such disbelief is named as ultimate disbelief.

But the cursed one's being a polytheist is because he became damned and engaged himself in misguiding human beings. He called to polytheism; and things like idol-worship etc. are his inventions only. It is obvious that invention of polytheism and trapping people into it is a thousand times worse than his personal polytheism so the cursed one is the first disbeliever and the chief of the polytheists.

This summary of this question is that the Almighty Allah has said in Quran that Allah would not forgive one who associates others with Him and, excepting the sin of polytheism, He would forgive the sins of whomsoever He wishes.

Therefore, since Satan, in the beginning, only refused to prostrate for Adam, he had not associated anyone with God, that is, he had not committed polytheism; his sin is worth forgiveness.

The gist of the reply is that Satan was a disbeliever from the beginning and thereafter led man to disbelief and he also became a polytheist and encouraged people to various kinds of polytheism. From the very beginning till now, he has no faith in Allah. If it is said that Satan had accepted God and had believed in the Creator of the universe and that he only refused to obey His Commandment, then we reply that only to testify that there is a creator of the world of existence is not faith in Allah.

Faith in God means one must accept Allah as the creator, nourisher and upbringer of oneself and of every particle in the universe and also one must believe that he and all the things of the world are due to Allah only, and he should not consider himself and others as existing by themselves. He must also regard only Allah as worthy of worship. Thus he should surrender before only one God and to fear Him and to humble before Him. Only such a person is a believer in Allah.

Thus one who considers himself independent, like lblis, crosses the limits of being His servant and shows his own opinion, rather who considers his own opinion higher than the command of God and thus shows pride against God, has doubtlessly become a denier of God's Godship and Lordship and of His being the only deity worth worship. Such a person will not get a place except in Hell.

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ عَنْ عِبَادَتِي سَيَدْخُلُونَ جَهَنَّمَ دَاخِرِينَ {60}

"...surely those who are too proud for My service shall soon enter Hell abased. " (Al- Ghafir, 40:60)

Question 9

Q.9: It is said that in Ethereal Sphere (Aalame Zarr)9 the souls chose either righteousness or wretchedness. Now if it was forced, it is injustice and if it was volluntary, and if they possessed intelligence, how did they choose it? But if they had no sense, it would be improper to hold them accountable and to punish them. Please describe the circumstances in Ethereal Sphere (Aalame Zarr).

A: Allamah Majlisi (r.a.) has, in volume 3 of Biharul Anwar , quoted many narrations related to inborn human disposition (Teenat). Aalame Zarr and about taking of the covenant. It can be summarized as follows:

The Almighty created from the loins of His Eminence, Adam, the father of humanity, his progeny so that He may bring them out on Judgment Day in the form of particles as small as tiny ants. So in the beginning also they were like tiny ants. Thereafter the Almighty Allah connected their souls to their bodies. At that time also they possessed perfect wisdom and intelligence. They also had a perfectly free will.

Then, after taking covenant from them about His being only Allah One God and about His messengers and Imams (a.s.) He asked: “Am I not your Lord?" A number of them who were the right-siders, said obediently and enthusiastically: ''Yes of course," and thus they confessed and testified to the truth. The remaining, who were left-siders, hesitatingly and with disinclination said, 'Yes'. Then God took their test by bringing before them a fire. He ordered them to enter it. The former entered and the fire became cool for them. The remaining did not obey and did not enter and this test was taken thrice.

As regards the research and meaning of Teenat, Aalame Zarr and covenant, scholars of religion have three opinions:

The first is the school of traditionists who say that these traditions are ambiguous and to understand them is beyond us and it is enough to have faith in them and we should understand that the Imams (a.s.) know their meanings.

Another school of thought is that of Shaykh Mufeed, Sayyid Murtaza and Tabarsi, author of Majmaul Bayan and other commentators of Quran and their followers. They are of the opinion that traditions about Teenat and verses and narrations relating to covenant taking are figurative, allegoric and metaphoric with reference to the details mentioned in Sharh Kafi and Bihar; especially with regard to Aalame Zar, Shaykh Mufid (r.a.) says:

"The correct report is that the Almighty Allah brought out from the loins of Adam, his progeny like tiny ants and filled up the horizon therewith. Then He divided it into three pans. Some had effulgence (Noor) without darkness (Zulmat) and they were the selected ones who were pure of sins. Some were all darkness without light and they were the infidels who never did obey. Some others had a combination of both. They are those who obey and also disobey, among the believers.

The reason behind bringing out the progeny of Adam in this manner was that the Almighty Allah intended to introduce the numerosity of Adam's progeny to him and also to show His Might and Kingdom; to amaze him by His creation and to make him understand what was to happen after him. As regards the traditional reports containing the Almighty Allah's Words:

“am I not your lord...till the end”, its reply is that they are only solitary traditions and hence not quite reliable. On the contrary he says that they are forged.

Thereafter Shaykh Mufeed referred to the holy verse:

وَإِذْ أَخَذَ رَبُّكَ مِنْ بَنِي آدَمَ مِنْ ظُهُورِهِمْ ذُرِّيَّتَهُمْ وَأَشْهَدَهُمْ عَلَىٰ أَنْفُسِهِمْ أَلَسْتُ بِرَبِّكُمْ ۖ قَالُوا بَلَىٰ ۛ شَهِدْنَا ۛ أَنْ تَقُولُوا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِنَّا كُنَّا عَنْ هَٰذَا غَافِلِينَ

"And when your Lord brought forth from the children of Adam, from their backs, their descendants, and made them bear witness again.d their own souls: Am I not your Lord? They said: Yes! we bear witness. Lest you should say on the day of resurrection: Surely we were heedless of this.” (Al A’raaf, 7: 172)

Shaykh Mufeed said that this divine covenant was taken from the progeny of Adam whereby they admitted that Allah is the Creator of everything and that He is the Lord nourisher of everything and everyone and that He is the Only One God.

This truth, which all of them accepted was not merely a verbal covenant and it did not relate only to the time of Adam, the father of mankind. Rather it is a covenant, which is divinely created and which has remained with every human being along with his creation. In other words, the feeling of finding and knowing God and a capability to and readiness to accept the truth of God 's oneness and uniqueness is present in the soul of everyone right from their creation and this feeling about God 's existence is there in the mind of everyone as a self-understood matter. It is a divinely created instinct.

In this way, all human beings have the spirit of belief in only one God and a natural demand to worship only Him is made in the language of creation. Likewise, the answer to this question has also been in the same language. The summary of this question and answer and the covenant is a natural agreement, the signs of which are found by everyone even today in his or her heart.

So much so that modern psychologists too have found in their latest researches that religious awareness is innate in man which every human being finds in himself automatically. It is the same natural sense that has guided people to God throughout the ages. Every intelligent man who pays attention to his divinely bestowed instinct understands that he is a creation of a Creator and he is nourished by a nourisher and sustainer.

If you put something before a three or four-year-old child, he too, before extending h is hand, looks at the one who has placed that thing before him and as a result of his natural understanding follows that everything is brought by someone. There are many things in the Holy Quran and other texts which deal with questions and answers about man's natural faculties and abilities, which are omitted here due to exigency.

The third school of thought followed by many earlier and later day scholars says that all narrations about Teenat, Aalame Zarr and covenant are correct and their apparent meanings are also correct and there is no inconsistency between them and any logic or religious rules and principles.

If someone says that as a consequent of these narrations, one can say that there is compulsion in religion, because, in Aalame Zarr whatever a man accepted was involuntary, without an alternative, we reply that:

Firstly, whatever everyone confessed in that world was by his or her choice and understanding as said earlier. Rather some have even said that the wisdom of everyone in that world was greater than it is today.

Secondly, the tenor of the reports in this regard is that matters accepted in that world were never forced whereby in this facsimile world, everything must be accepted and acted upon. Rather it is possible that there may be a change as mentioned in a tradition in which Amirul Momineen (a.s.) is reported to have said:

"The Lord of the worlds stipulated change in destiny (Bada) in the left-sided folks."

That is, those who, in that world, willingly revolted and disobeyed became the left-sided folks. If they repent and obey the messengers of God, the Lord changes their destiny and places them among the right-sided folks as such a change is very much possible. That is why it is mentioned in the supplication of the holy month of Ramadan:

"If I am to be thrown into calamities, cancel my encounter with such misfortunes and write my name in the list of those who have been blessed to be fortunate, because You have said in Your Book:

يَمْحُو اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ ۖ وَعِنْدَهُ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ

"Allah makes to pass away and establishes what He pleases, and with Him is the basis of' the Book." (Ar- Ra’ad, 13:39)

As regards the question about their being intelligent and how they preferred to put themselves in a loss? We say that such exclamation is out of place, because it is often seen that many wise and intelligent people, in several matters, knowingly and voluntarily do things which harm them and thereafter repent for their misdeeds. Likewise, the accursed Satan knowingly and intentionally disobeyed God's command and refused to prostrate before Adam (a.s.).

Question 10: Where is the avenger of the martyrs of Kerbala?

Where is the avenger of the martyrs of Kerbala?10

Q.10: Mukhtar punished the killers of Imam Husain (a.s.) and their chastisement in the Hereafter is at the discretion of Allah. Would they become alive during the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) and bepunished for a second time?

A: According to the sayings of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), Imam Mahdi (a.s.) would kill those from the progeny of killers of His Eminence, Chief of Martyrs, Imam Husain (a.s.), who are pleased by the said killing and who pride upon the oppression committed by their forefathers and thus, are participants intentionally, verbally and actively. As regards the killers of the Imam (a.s.), we have not received solid proofs that they will be enlivened and taken revenge from, although it is mentioned in a number of traditions that during the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.), the Almighty Allah will enliven many disbelievers so that they may observe the kingdom of Aale Muhammad (a.s.) and that revenge may be taken from them.

It is possible that the killers of Imam Husain (a.s.) may also be among them. As regards the statement that Mukhtar has punished them, firstly, it is not certain that Mukhtar punished all of them. Maybe those who were not killed by Mukhtar may be killed by Imam Mahdi (a.s.). Secondly, we may say that there is no hindrance in the matter of making a dead one alive and then killing him in this world at the hands of Imam Mahdi (a.s.), because, it cannot be called sufficient even if the killers of a prophet or an Imam are killed a thousand times. As for the rule that a murder is punishable only by killing the murderer once it is so only because killing anyone a second time is not practicable in this world and not because he should be killed only once.

Hence there is no doubt that those killed by Mukhtar would again be killed by Imam Mahdi (a.s.) by the command of Allah and it will be perfect justice, but the actual point is that it is not quite certain and agreed upon, as mentioned earlier. For further details, please refer to Tafsir Burhan under the interpretation of the following verse:

وَمَنْ قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيِّهِ سُلْطَانًا فَلَا يُسْرِفْ فِي الْقَتْلِ ۖ إِنَّهُ كَانَ مَنْصُورًا

"...and whoever is slain unjustly, We have indeed given to his heir authority so let him not exceed the just limits in slaying; surely he is aided.” (Al Isra 17:33)

Question 11

Q.11: Please explain 'change of destiny' (Bada) in a convincing manner.

A: Change of destiny (Bada) in the created world is like the cancellation of decrees in the legal sense. Thus canceJlation of a legal command means withdrawal of the earlier order and establishment of another due to a change in divine strategy.

Likewise, Bada means change made by God in the affairs of His servants through change in strategy like removal of a calamity as a result of supplication or charity extension in lifespan because of good behavior with relatives etc. For example, the calamity which had befallen the community of Prophet Yunus (a.s.) was removed due to its earnest supplications.

According to a narration in Biharul Anwar, Imam Sadiq (a.s.) is reported to have said that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said: Verily a person behaves nicely with his relatives as a result of which the Almighty Allah makes the remainder of three years in his lifespan into thirty years. It also so happens that a person behaves badly with his relations and as a result, the Almighty Allah turns the remainder of thirty years of his life into only three years. Then he (s.a.w.s.) said:

يَمْحُو اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ

"Allah makes to pass away and establishes what He pleases ...” (Ar-Ra’ad, 13:39)

It is also mentioned in Biharul Anwar, Vol. 17, that Amirul Momineen (a.s.) said: The number of death due to abundance of sins are more than deaths due to the arrival of the appointed day and the number of persons living as a result of good deeds is more than the lives reaching their destined lifespans.11 Making changes in the destiny of man due to his deeds is one of the honors of the Almighty Allah, concerning His Lordship and sovereignty. It also leads people to turn earnestly to Him and to perform good deeds. Therefore, the Holy Imams (a.s.) have accorded much importance to it.

Imam Baqir (a.s.) is reported to have said that God has not been worshipped through anything like belief in Bada ; that is, they have considered trust in Bada a great belief. It is also said in another narration that God has not considered anything greater than belief in Bada.

It is mentioned in Al-Kafi that Imam Baqir (a.s.) said that God did not appoint any messenger unless and until He took covenant from him on three matters:

1. His worship

2. Belief in His oneness and uniqueness

3. Belief that He advances whatever He wishes and delays whatever He likes.12

It is also mentioned in Al-Kafi that Imam Sadiq (a.s.) said:

"If people knew how much reward is there in the belief in Bada, they would not tire talking about it."13

As regards the reason of naming it as Bada, it denotes manifestation of a thing after its remaining hidden. It does not mean that the Almighty Allah changed the destiny because He was wrong the first time (God forbid!) So whenever He makes a change in affairs of any of His servants, it is said: Bada has occurred; that is, what was hidden has now become manifest.

In other words, God made manifest what was hidden to people because of absence of information about the causes. This is also the aim of Imam Sadiq 's (a.s.) saying:

“Allah has not manifested anything as He manifested in the case of Ismail, (who was son of the Imam)."

This is a hint to another tradition which says: It was decreed for Ismail to be killed twice. Then I requested the Lord to remove the calamity and He removed his assassination."

Question 12

Q.12: Blackness and whiteness, blindness and sight, ugliness and beauty, wisdom and lunacy; these things show lack of justice. The ugly one and the blind is deprived of many bounties of this world and such persons can perform fewer good deeds. Will they be compensated in the Hereafter? Would they be punished if they die as infidels? Should they be losers in both the worlds?

A: Difference in the creation of men, like deformity and beauty, perfection in stature and defects therein as well as all other drawbacks like poverty and wealth, health and illness etc. All these things carry wisdom and strategies behind them. Here we shall mention some of them:

Firstly: Things are known by their opposite. If there is no ugliness, how will one understand beauty? If there is no perfection, defectiveness will never be recognized and so on.

Secondly: Such differences are there so that the overall might of God may be manifested: that He is powerful over everything. In certain cases, this difference is to show God 's kindness or anger.

Thirdly: For some persons, their benefit lies in ugliness or blindness or, for instance, poverty and illness etc. If they really come to know the truth behind everything, they would prefer what Allah has destined for them.

It is narrated that one of the prophets was walking near the banks of a river when he observed some children; among whom was a blind child and other children were harassing him. Sometimes they also forced the blind child's head in water. That prophet was moved and he prayed to the Almighty Allah to bestow sight to that blind boy. His prayer was answered and the blind boy was given sight. But after that he began to drown the other children right away. The prophet exclaimed: "My Lord, You know the best! Please return him to his earlier condition." There are many examples testifying to this truth.

Fourthly: Differences between people are for their test and for manifestation of their righteousness and wickedness, because the afflicted are being tested in the matter of patience and submission to the will of God and thereby they are raised to the status of patient ones and those who are given bounties and abilities are tested in the matter of thankfulness and obedience to God with regard to their behavior with the disabled. It is, therefore, said:

وَجَعَلْنَا بَعْضَكُمْ لِبَعْضٍ فِتْنَةً أَتَصْبِرُونَ

"...and We have made some of you a trial for others; will you bear patiently?' " (Al Furqan, 25:20)

As regards compensation of depravities, there is no doubt that such compensation will be made fully and in a nice way. One of the beautiful names of God is Jabbar, meaning: The Compensator. It is an established principle in religious philosophy that Almighty Allah compensates for every trouble, hardship, calamity and deprivation in proportion to the person’s contentment with divine will. But of course, this applies only to things, which are only from Allah, having no interference of anyone else.

It is narrated in Al- Kafi under the chapter of "Distress of the faithful" that lbne Abi Ya'fur once complained to Imam Sadiq (a.s.) about the pains, which he was suffering continuously. Imam (a.s.) replied:

··o Abdullah, if a believer comes to know the quantum of reward for a pain and calamity, he would wish to be shredded into pieces. "14

It is mentioned volume 11 of Biharul Anwar that Abu Basir, a visually challenged gentleman, once came to Imam Baqir (a.s.) and asked: "Is it true that you can enliven the dead and cure a leper?" The Imam replied: "Yes, by the command of Allah." Abu Basir asked the Imam to cure his blindness.

Imam (a.s.) said: Come near me. Then he passed his holy hand over Abu Basir's eyes and the latter was able to see. He said: "Now I can see everything."

Imam (a.s.) asked: "Would you like to remain like this (and get worldly benefits) and be Iikc others (bearing pains and hardshi s of Hereafter) or you would wish to return to your earlier condition and enter Paradise without accounting for anything?"

Abu Basir replied: "I prefer blindness," and the Imam returned him to his earlier state.

This tradition shows that in lieu of the trouble of blindness in this world, one will be spared hardships of accounting of life­ long deeds in the Hereafter.

It is also mentioned in many narrations that on Judgment Day, the Most Merciful God will show sympathy to those who suffered in the world and whose prayers were not answered due to some strategy and He would tell them: "'Today, I will give you whatever you ask for." The compensation will be so generous that everyone would wish that none of his wishes had been fulfilled in the world.

As regards the fate of those who were deprived due to general strategy of the world or for some special strategy, and who also died in a state of infideli ty; that can they be called as losers in both the world?

Our reply is: Since deprivation of such persons from divine compensation in the other world is because of their voluntary disbelief, this matter is out of question as a disbeliever has no share in the Hereafter.

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَظْلِمُ النَّاسَ شَيْئًا وَلَٰكِنَّ النَّاسَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ يَظْلِمُونَ

"Surely Allah does not do any injustice to men, but men are unjust to themselves. " (Surah Yunus, I 0:44)

Question 13

Q.13: Two righteous people live in this world, one for 30 years and another for 60. The first objects to God: Why could I not remain alive longer like my brother in order to worship more and earn more reward...? What is the answer?

A: More or less of deeds is from the viewpoint of either quantity: such as one remains awake for a year engaging oneself in ritual prayer, recitations and also fasts during days and utilizes his wealth to fulfill only his genuine needs and donates the rest to charity; or it is from the viewpoint of quality.

For example, one only offers the obligatory evening and night prayer with full concentration, humility, fear and respect, and then he goes to sleep. Such prayer is of course better than one that does not have these qualities though one may remain engaged in prayer all night. It is mentioned in Biharul Anwar that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said:

"Two units of ritual prayer offered with sincerity are better than a whole night of worship."15

Moreover, the deed of one who has more piety is higher in quality; and more likely to be granted a greater reward. There are many examples of this.

After this preface, we can say that it is possible that one who had a lifespan of only thirty years, but he spent his life in worship; he may have got more good sense whereby his deeds might have become better than one who lived for sixty years. Therefore, there is no scope of such a doubt.

Second reply: It is possible that one lives and worships for thirty years and then God makes him die in such conditions that had he lived longer, he would have faced such trials and hardships and changes in life, whereby it would not have been possible for him to perform more good deeds; on the contrary he would have been likely to lose whatever good he had earned and, finally, on Judgment Day he might have realized that his death at that time was a great and special mercy of God on him. Thus there is no scope to ask why he did not get a longer life.

Third reply: It is also possible that one, who was to live more, used his freedom badly and committed evil deeds like cruelty with relatives or false witnessing etc., thereby inviting a cut in his destined age. Likewise, it is also possible that one who got a sixty-year life earned that extension because of good deeds which cause a longer lifespan. Imam Sadiq (a.s.) is responded to have said: "Those who die due to sins are more than those who die because of destined death. Likewise those who live because of good deeds are more than those who live due to destined life."16

On Judgment Day, all realities would become evident and then there will be no scope for such questions.

Question 14

Q.14: After being driven out how did Satan enter Paradise and misguide Adam? If he could enter Paradise, he was not accursed and if he entered in the form of a snake or through any other trick, then God did not drive him away.

A: The garden wherein Adam and Hawwa stayed and where Satan misguided Adam was not the everlasting Paradise (Jannat-e- Khuld), which is promised to the obedient servants of God. So it is useless to ask how the devil entered it. Shaykh Kulaini and Shaykh Sadooq have narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) that the garden in which Adam and Hawwa lived was a garden of this world where sun and moon rose and set. Had it been the Paradise of the Hereafter or had it been the promised Paradise, Adam would not have been driven out of it.

As regards what is said about the arrival of Satan in the form of serpent or in the mouth of a snake, it is incorrect and such rumors are worth less although some have considered them allegorical. For more detail s refer to Tafsir al-Mizan

Question 15

Q.15: ls the present Satan the very first original Satan or he has progeny and descendents? If he has, why God created other satans from the one which was already condemned?

A: Yes, Satan is the same original Satan who is named Iblis and who is to survive till Judgment Day.

قَالَ فَإِنَّكَ مِنَ الْمُنْظَرِينَ

إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْوَقْتِ الْمَعْلُومِ

“ He said: So surely you are of the respited ones. Till the period of the time made known.” (Al Hijr, 15:37-38)

Also he has very many children and progeny as mentioned in the Holy Quran:

أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ أَوْلِيَاءَ

"...would you then take him and his offspring for friends ...” (Al Kahf, 1 8:49)

And He also says:

إِنَّهُ يَرَاكُمْ هُوَ وَقَبِيلُهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا تَرَوْنَهُمْ ۗ

"...he surely sees you, he as well as his host from whence you cannot see them ...” (Al- A’raaf 7:27)

As for the reason of creation of satans and infidels, it is the goodness of creation and imminent invention. On the contrary to refrain from it is stopping of grace and hence undesirable in every condition. What is ready and worthy of coming into existence, Allah would bring it into existence. But the wicked aspects, which arise from some creations like satans and infidels is due to their wrongful choice and, therefore, the condemnation is related to them and not to their Creator.

In other words He created satans and infidels and gave them freedom of choice and also made them responsible, informing them of the things, which would benefit them, but they disobeyed Him and made themselves deprived of good and became sources of mischieves. Thus, whatever is from Allah is all good and nice and whatever is condemnable is from the creatures themselves.

If it is said: What is the wisdom of accepting this origin and what is the benefit in creation of satans? We may reply: One of the wisdoms behind it, is the coming out of some righteous and faithful persons from their progeny like Haam bin Heern. It is obvious that even if only one true believer is born, it is enough to achieve the aim of creation.

It is mentioned in Al-Kafi that if not more than one single believer person is there on the earth, it is sufficient. One of the wisdoms behind the creation of satans is the huge benefit which the believers get by not paying attention to deceptions and doubts raised by them. First ly: satans are means, through which you can differentiate between a righteous and a corrupt character. It is said:

وَمَا كَانَ لَهُ عَلَيْهِمْ مِنْ سُلْطَانٍ إِلَّا لِنَعْلَمَ مَنْ يُؤْمِنُ بِالْآخِرَةِ مِمَّنْ هُوَ مِنْهَا فِي شَكٍّ

"And he has no authority over them, but that We may distinguish him who. believes in the hereafter from him who is in doubt concerning it..." (As-Saba, 34:21)

Secondly, deceptions of satans cause the believer to earn divine grace and salvation if he opposes them. On the contrary, such a person attains a rank higher than that of angels.

Question 16

Q.16: Kindly explain the difference between the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mahfooz) and the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) and also between destiny (Taqdeer) and free will (Tadbeer). Are supplications and devotions effective in destined matters?

A: Scholars have made deep studies in the matter of the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Ma/ooz) and the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat). One of them, Allamah Tabarsi (a.r.) says in Sharhe Usul Kafi: Verses of Quran and traditions prove that the Almighty Allah has created two tablets and recorded in them whatever takes place.

The first is the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mafooz) wherein there is no change under any circumstances and it is according to the knowledge of the Almighty Allah. Another tablet is the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) wherein He records one thing and then erases it through many exigencies and strategies which are not concealed from the wise.

For example, He records in it the age of Zaid as 50 years, that is, it is according to strategy that he should live for fifty years, provided he does not do anything which increases or decreases one's lifespan. Then if he behaves nicely with his relatives, Allah erases '50' and writes '60' and if he disregards the rights of his blood relatives '50' is turned to '40'. But in the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mahfooz) it is mentioned what has to happen. For instance, if Zaid or Hasan behaves nicely with his relatives, which cause increase in lifespan, from the very beginning, what is recorded in lauhe Mahfooz is 60. And he willfully behaves badly with relatives, the figure of 40 is there already fixed in lauhe Mahfooz.

Summarily speaking, there never occurs any change in Lauhe Mahfooz; on the contrary what is going to happen, is from the very beginning recorded in it. Of course, changes are possible in lauhe Mahwo Athhaat question, which is called as modified destiny (Bada) (This was discussed in the related question).

If it is asked what is the use of Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) if whatever is to happen, is already recorded in Protected Tablet (lauhe Mahfooz)?

We reply: There are many things of wisdom. Allamah Majlisi has written some of them incling the one that there are angels who write the tablets. Those who come to know about that tablet by the Grace of Almighty Allah Lord concerning His servant after the Messengers and Imams know about them, they inform God 's servants about the same saying that your good deeds have such effects and also that their misdeeds also can cause harm to you. Certainly such information make the believers attend good deeds and refrain from bad ones.

Among the deeds which can change the things destined in Tablet of erasing and writing (lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) are charities and supplications. That is why much emphasis is put on these two things in related traditions and verses. Here we suffice with only one tradition of Al- Kaji under the Chapter of supplication wards off calamities and death".

It is narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) that he said:

"Verily supplication erases destiny and breaks it into pieces just as a rope is broken into pieces after it was wound tightly."17

It means that a thing which had been firmly fixed in destiny is erased through supplication, just as in the case of the people of Prophet Yunus (a.s.) a calamity which had came very near to them was deferred due to the earnest prayers and collective supplications offered sincerely by that community.

Notes

1. Usul Kafi , Vol. 2 , Pg. 452; Biharul Anwar, Vol. 73, Pg. 387

2. Usul Kafi, Vol.1 pg.160, Tr.13

3. Nahjul Balagha, Subhi Salih, Saying no. 250, Pg. 511

4. Mafatihul Jinan, Post Prayer Recitation of Asr Prayer

5. Further details about the ‘weak’ are given in reply to question 34 which may be referred to

6. Further details about the 'weak ' are given in reply to question 34 which may be referred to.

7. Usul Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 93-94

8. Usul Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 97

9. Initial stage of creation; in which human beings existed only as spirits. (Aalam=world, Zar=particle)

10. Mafatihul Jinan, Dua Nudbah

11. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 78, Pg 83

12. Al-Kafi, Vol. I , Pg. l 46 [Allah is not worshipped as much as He is worshipped through the beli ef i n Bada ] J n the same source it is mentioned that the Al mighty A llah is not exalted by anything as much as He is exalted through belief in Boda.

And in Biharul Anwar, Vol. 27, Pg. 286 i t is narrated from Imam Muham mad Baq ir (a.s.) that he said: A11ah did not send any prophet except that he made the people swear to three points: Belief in Allah, in His oneness and belief that He post pones and advances whatever He likes.

13. Al- Kafi. Vol. I, Pg. 148

14. Al-Kafi, Vol. 3, Pg. 354

15. Biharul Anwar. Vol. 84, Pg. 264

16. Biharul Anwar , Vo l. 83, Pg. 354

17. Al- Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 2 15

Divine Justice (Adl)

وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ {54}

"And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners.” (Aale ‘Imran, 3:54)

Question 4

Q.4: What is the difference between planning (Makr) of God and the planning (Makr) of a man?

A: Makr of man consists of deceit and cheating to which a fellow resorts with a view to save himself or to overcome others or to fulfill his corrupt wishes.

But the Makr of Almighty Allah is a form of punishment, revenge and anger against man 's evil deed. This chastisement is kept secret from the man. The sinner does not know that he is under God's anger. For example, respiting the infidels and transgressors, so that their disobedience may multiply thereby making them liable to a greater chastisement in the Hereafter:

إِنَّمَا نُمْلِي لَهُمْ لِيَزْدَادُوا إِثْمًا ۚ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُهِينٌ

"We grant them respite only that they may add to their sins ...” (Aale ‘lmran, 3: 178)

Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) said:

"By God, God did not chastise them more severely than by respiting them (so that their sins may increase and so also their punishment consequently)."

Also it is like 'gradual arrest ' (lstidraaj), in which whenever a person indulges in a new sin, Allah grants him a new favor, so that by remaining occupied in that blessing, the sinner may not realize that he is disobedient to Allah and that he may not repent for his sins.

It is narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.): "When a servant is under the kindness and mercy of Allah and when Allah desires good for him, He puts him into trouble after he has committed a sin so that he may repent and be reminded of Allah and that he may purify himself of that sin. On the other hand, when Allah is enraged with a man, He bestows him a new blessing as a result of which he forgets repentance and continues to sin. This is what the Almighty Allah says:

وَالَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا سَنَسْتَدْرِجُهُمْ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

"We draw them near (to destruction) by degrees from whence they know not. "(Al Araaf 7: 182)1

As regards calling this kind of divine punishment a Makr it is that the Makr of men, is both selfish and oppressive. This chastisement from Allah is by way of recompense based on justice. It is a similar action, but different in its aim. Moreover, Makr of men, due to weakness and lack of encompassing is mostly a failure, whereas a similar Makr from Allah is perfect in power and effectiveness, which fulfils its aim. That is why He Himself says:

وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ

''And Allah is the best of planners." (Aale ’lmran, 3:54)

اللَّهُ أَسْرَعُ مَكْرً

"Allah is quicker to plan ...” (Yunus, l0:21)

وَأُمْلِي لَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّ كَيْدِي مَتِينٌ

"And I grant them respite; surely My scheme is effective.” (Al A’araaf, 7: 183)

Or since divine punishment is effective against Makr of man it is true to call it as a Makr from Allah. For example:

وَجَزَاءُ سَيِّئَةٍ سَيِّئَةٌ مِثْلُهَ

"And the recompense of evil is punishment like it..." (Ash-Shura 42:40)

In fact the compensation of an evil is, in fact, not an evil as it based on justice, but it is all right to call it as such. Just as it is correct to say that the consequence of evil is evil and likewise to say that the recompense of a person's Makr is a Makr against him. However, divine Makr is never condemnable. On the contrary it is justice and that is why the Makr of man is called a bad Makr:

ۚ وَلَا يَحِيقُ الْمَكْرُ السَّيِّئُ إِلَّا بِأَهْلِهِ ۚ

"..and the evil plans shall not beset any save the authors of it..."(Al Fatir, 35:42)

We should know that planning (Makr) and excuse (Heela) is in the meaning of a remedy and planning through hidden means for getting a benefit or to avoid harm. It is of two kinds:

The good planning, which is from the Merciful God and bad and devilish planning.

1. The good planning is that which is through permissible means and which is for getting permissible gain, in which one plans correctly and rightly. And it is to save oneself or others from harms and to be protected from oppression. In short, a remedial measure or planning for rightful aims is all right from both the viewpoint of wisdom and as well as Shariat laws. It is both desirable and meritorious.

2. Bad planning (Makr) is that which is done for devilish aims. For example: to plan to make money through unlawful means or to harm others or to obstruct the truth.

This is with regard to Makr of man, but Makr of God, is doubtlessly, the correct planning, which is both right and praiseworthy as it foils the devilish designs of unjust. It returns to them the losses of their Makr. It enables religion and its supporters to win over the enemies.

Another point is that divine planning is by way of retribution and furthermore it is against the designs of sinners and unjust and is a plan against their plans.

To understand the meaning of divine Makr look at the following verses of the Holy Quran:

وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ

"And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners.” (Aal ‘Imran, 3:54)

It means: Jews and enemies of Christ planned to eliminate him and his law. In other words, they plotted and through devilish means, tried to obstruct the divine call. God also then made a plan against them to save the life of Christ and to protect his Shariat. He took remedial measures and foiled their plans and, of course, God is the best solution for those who inquire.

A person named Yahuda was a companion of His Eminence, Isa Masih (a.s.), but he was a hypocrite and a spy. At night when Isa (a.s.) was alone and none of his companions were with him, Yahuda informed the Jews of his whereabouts.

It was a dark night. The Jews told Yahuda: "Go in and bring out Isa so that we may kill him." When Yahuda arrived, Almighty Allah saved Isa (a.s.) and Yahuda could not see him; so he returned to the Jews while Allah had made his face exactly like that of Isa (a.s.). They apprehended him and when he cried that he is Yahuda and not Isa, they did not pay any heed to him and they finally killed him. Some have said that from the very beginning, Yahuda resembled Isa (a.s.) and that during that night he was apprehended and executed by the Jews.

وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ وَيَمْكُرُونَ وَيَمْكُرُ اللَّهُ

"And when those who disbelieved devised plans against you that they might confine you or slay you or drive you away; and they devised plans and Allah too had arranged a plan; and Allah is the best of planners.” (Al Anfaal, 8:30)

It means that the leaders of Quraish gathered in Darun Nadwah to plot about driving away Prophet Muhammad (s.a:w.s.). Abul Bakhtari suggested: "He should be tightly chained and imprisoned in a closed room; and food and water be sent to him daily until he dies therein."

Shaykh Najdi said: "This is a defective suggestion, because Bani Hashim and their supporters would free him."

Hisham bin Amr said: "'Muhammad must be tied to the back of a camel, which should be driven out to the desert, so that he may starve to death."

Shaykh Najdi said: "He would certainly meet Arab tribals on the way and he would attract them; and they will save him. Finally he would join hands with them to fight us."

Abu Jahl said: "In my opinion, we should recruit a person from every clan so that all of them jointly kill him and thus his blood money may be shared by various different clans. In this way, Bani Hashim will not be able to fight all the tribes and consequently be obliged to accept blood money."

Shaykh Najdi said: "This is the best option." Some have said that it was the opinion of Shaykh Najdi from the very beginning and that all had agreed to it later.

So Abu Jahl recruited one person from every family. They resolved that one night all of them should gather outside the house of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) and then assassinate him jointly.

Jibraeel (a.s.) informed the Messenger of Allah about the planning of Quraish and told him that it is the command of Allah that he should leave Mecca. So the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) told Amirul Momineen (a.s.): "Remain in my place and sleep in my bed so that the Quraish may not find it vacant and follow me." Then he went out of his house to the cave of Thawr.

The Quraish sent a spy to his house who came back to inform them that Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) was in his house; so they surrounded the house that night. At dawn, they finally entered the house fully armed to eliminate the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) but Amirul Momineen (a.s.) arose from the bed and demanded: "'What do you want?"

They replied: "We want Muhammad, where is he?" Ali (a.s.) replied: "I am not a watchman over him." They turned back from there and with the help of an expert tracker reached the cave of Thawr. But by divine command, spiders weaved webs at the mouth of that cave so thickly that, seeing it, the Quraish remarked: "Had Muhammad entered this cave, these webs would have been destroyed. Therefore it is clear that he has not entered it." So they returned from there. Three days later, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) migrated to Medina.

The above incident well explains what the Makr of polytheists of Mecca meant and that it was a devilish and oppressive Makr and that the Makr of Allah was by way of retribution and that it was totally just.

Question 5

Q. 5. Kindly explain the following tradition with examples:

‘‘Neither, fatalism nor free will,· it is a matter between the two extremes2

A: No fatalism means there is no force or compulsion, whereby man may, in his good or bad deeds, be absolutely helpless like a mere instrument of the will of God; that he may not have any power or choice. Falseness of belief in fatalism is one of the self-evident truths, because every sensible person, by conscience knows that he is having a free will and that his voluntary deeds are not like trembling etc. which is involuntarily. Therefore Muhaqqiq Qummi in his Kitabe Qawanin writes:

"Even if the fatalists bring thousands of arguments in favor of fatalism, they are proved baseless and false before self-evident things."

Moreover, this fatalism essentially falsifies the theory of reward and punishment in the Hereafter because, one who is helpless in the matter of obedience or disobedience (good or bad deeds), is logically not entitled to any reward or punishment. He does not deserve either to be praised or criticized even in this world. The fact is that if one commits a bad deed, all wise people consider him guilty and liable to criticism and punishment. No one considers him helpless.

Free will is also not possible as it would mean that man is able to do everything he desires; that he has full and total authority and ability to do whatever he wants in every matter. This belief is also false according to conscience, like the falsity of fatalism, because every sane person has experience that in many matters, he desired something, but it was not achieved due to some hindrance between his wish and the deed desired by him. He failed to do what he wanted to. Sometimes he even faces the exact opposite of his wish.

Therefore Amirul Momineen (a.s.) is reported to have said: "I recognized God through the failure of desires and inability to achieve wanted things."3 Is there any sane person who considers himself able to do whatever he wants? He knows very well that:

"Neither his profit nor his loss nor his death nor his life nor his rising is in his control."4

Also, the requisite of this belief of Free will adopted by the Mutazali is that they believe in 'associates' of Allah, because when they believe that man has absolute power to do whatever he desires, they consider themselves to have the rank of the Almighty Allah (Who alone is All-Powerful with absolute authority over everything). Some of the words of the Mutazalieven negate God's power vis a vis man 's.

"'But it is a matter between two matters." Man is neither totally without freedom of choice about what he likes nor does he has absolute power to do everything he desires. On the contrary, in all voluntary affairs, he requires the will of God to be in favor of his desired deed.

Otherwise what he wants to do will not be done. Likewise, he also requires the will of God in every affair. Also in all good deeds, people are in need of the grace of God. Also evil and sinful deeds of disobedience are due to the allowance granted by God. Of course, both the grace and allowance depend on the wish of man. That is why Amirul Momineen (a.s.) said in reply to a person's question about the meaning of: "There is no power or might except by Allah," that:

"There is no power in us in the matter of disobeying God, except under the allowance of God. Likewise we don't have any ability in performing good deeds except with the assistance of Allah."

In another tradition, he said:

“Good is by the grace of God and evil is due to the allowance granted by God."

Question 6

Q.6: Perhaps there are some people in Australia, Africa or America who have never even heard about Islam or about its rules and regulations. What their position will be after death?

A: Indeed such people will not be chastised after their death. They will not be questioned. From the viewpoint of logic and Islamic law they do not attract divine anger and punishment.

It is common sense that holding them responsible would be against Divine Justice, as arguments have not been exhausted for them. As regards the divine law, it is mentioned in Quran that:

إِلَّا الْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالنِّسَاءِ وَالْوِلْدَانِ لَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ حِيلَةً وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ سَبِيلًا

فَأُولَٰئِكَ عَسَى اللَّهُ أَنْ يَعْفُوَ عَنْهُمْ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًا

"Except the weak from among the men and the children who have neither in their power the means nor can they find a way (to escape); so these, it may be, Allah will pardon them, and Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving. " (An-Nisa, 4:98,99)

It is mentioned in Kifayatul Muwahhideen: The 'weak ' may include men and women who lack intelligence and arguments might not have been presented and exhausted for them.5

Such people might not have known anything about Islam and faith or may not have the means or power to get such information. Perhaps they are silly, mad, deaf or dumb and those who lived in the days of ignorance and died therein. In other words all those are 'weak' for whom arguments have not been exhausted.

Infidels are those, who during their lives, did not cultivate faith in God and Judgment Day and died in a state of disbelief. Transgressors are sinners and oppressors; they are unjust people, who committed evil deeds and who died without repenting. Punishment to them after their death depends upon their defaults. If they were helpless, they will not be chastised and if they were defaulters, their punishment will be in accordance with their faults.

Here helplessness is in the meaning of falling short. For example, a person is only one meter tall and his food or medicine is out of his reach. If he dies, he will not be punished after death. But if one is able to take the food or medicine, but keeps sitting and consequently dies. Such a person is indeed a defaulter and hence responsible; and will be punished for committing suicide.6

Therefore those who, due to lack of intelligence could not get faith in God, the Hereafter and other true beliefs and die in that state of ignorance, are weak and not liable to divine punishment and so also those to whom true beliefs never reached till the end of their lives, or if reached, they could not find a way to obtain them and thus were really disabled. In other words, all those who were truly weak and who did not make a default will not be punished.

Transgressors are those who commit sins whose evil and unlawfulness is known to them through natural human sense like killing someone without a cause and oppressing others or being excessive to others; such people are not weak, on the contrary they are defaulters. Thus, a disbeliever who is weak from the viewpoint of his infidelity - if he kills someone wrongfully - after his death he will not be punished for his infidelity due to his inability to know the truth. But he will, anyhow, be chastised for manslaughter. It is so because with regard to his faith, he can say: I had no way of finding the true faith. But from the viewpoint of manslaughter, he cannot say: I did not know that it was an offence. Though he had not heard the commandments of God and religion, his nature and common sense has exhausted the argument for him.

As regards sins proved from the viewpoint of religion, like missing or giving up of prayers and fasts etc.; if he was really helpless, as mentioned earlier in detail, he will not be questioned and punished.

Question 7

Q.7: It is hard for common sense to understand the verse of the Holy Quran which says:

يُضِلُّ اللَّهُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَيَهْدِي مَنْ يَشَاءُ ۚ

"Thus does Allah make err whom He pleases ...” (Al-Muddaththir, 74:31)

Please explain in detail.

A: This holy verse carries several meanings:

One is regarding knowledge about the Almighty Allah's authority over guidance and misguidance for anyone whom He wishes and that He is able to draw him to good or evil willy-nilly, but since withdrawal of free will is against Divine wisdom, He does not do so, because if He does so, one cannot be either rewarded or punished. Therefore the verse only informs us about God's ability and it does not mean that he really takes this step.

Another reason is that the meaning of guidance in this verse is not showing of the way as the same has already been conveyed to all responsible beings through prophets and Imams (a.s.). Similarly the meaning of guidance here is also not the attaining of the aim without free will or intention of man, because it too negates ones being entitled to reward or punishment.

Hence what is meant by guidance and misguidance in this verse is divine sense (Taufeeq) or abandoning (Khizlaan). Taufeeq means that the Almighty Allah pays special attention to His servant and makes the path of good easy for him thereby making him inclined to good and by increasing his desire to do good. He provides for him the means, which help him succeed and does not withhold from him means which can keep him away from sinning.

The perfect kind of such guidance is that by which God makes His servant taste the sweetness of good and the bitterness of evil. It i s obvious that such guidance, which facilitates the path of success, does not conflict with or does not negate man's free will. Therefore the meaning of this verse is: God sheds His favor on His servant by providing him with all the means of success to whoever He wants and deprives those He wants of His favors and leaving such a person to himself (to do whatever he likes).

But it should be clear that the will of Allah is not random; it is in accordance with the entitlement of man to get guidance or misguidance. Man makes himself eligible of God's favor by following and accepting the call of the divine prophets.

وَالَّذِينَ اهْتَدَوْا زَادَهُمْ هُدًى وَآتَاهُمْ تَقْوَاهُمْ

"And (as for) those who follow the right direction, He increases them in guidance and gives them their guarding (against evil).,,” (Muhammad, 47: 17)

Since guidance and good sense (Taufeeq) of God has stages, when God grants His favor and the servant accepts it thankfully, he becomes entitled to a higher rank. Likewise it is also possible that a man by his inclination to evil may make himself eligible for misguidance and deprivation.

Other interpretations of this verse are also there, but for now this should suffice.

Question 8

Q.8: The Satan was a monotheist and now also he is a monotheist How then would this verse not apply to him?

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَغْفِرُ أَنْ يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَٰلِكَ لِمَنْ يَشَاءُ ۚ وَمَنْ يُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا

"Surely Allah does not forgive that anything should be associated with Him, and He forgives what is besides this to whom He pleases ..." (An- Nisa, 4: 1 16)

A: It is true that Satan was not a polytheist in the beginning, because polytheism means to take someone as a partner of God in His creation, obedience or worship. Such polytheism was not there in the devil; but disbelief is worse than polytheism, because it is to give up the obedience of Almighty Allah due to enmity or ego; and according to Quran, Satan was a disbeliever, which is worse than being a polytheist.

أَبَىٰ وَاسْتَكْبَرَ وَكَانَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ

"…He refused and he was proud, and he was one of the unbelievers." (Al Baqarah, 2:34)

And in Al-Kafi it is narrated from Zurarah that Imam Baqir (a.s.) said: By Allah, disbelief is older than polytheism and so also dirtier and more serious. Then the Imam recalled the disbelief of lblis when Allah ordered him to prostrate before Adam, but he disobeyed.7 Thus infidelity is graver than polytheism.

Imam Sadiq (a.s.) was asked which of the two: disbelief and polytheism is older? He replied that disbelief is older, because Iblis was the first to become a disbeliever and his disbelief was not like polytheism, because he did not invite others to worship anyone other than God and, in fact, thereafter he extended such an invitation and became a polytheist.8

It is clear from the tradition that Satan is both a disbeliever as well as a polytheist, but his disbelief is due to the fact that he disobeyed God's command and in other words denied the Lordship, divinity and His right to be obeyed and worshipped. In a tradition of Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) such disbelief is named as ultimate disbelief.

But the cursed one's being a polytheist is because he became damned and engaged himself in misguiding human beings. He called to polytheism; and things like idol-worship etc. are his inventions only. It is obvious that invention of polytheism and trapping people into it is a thousand times worse than his personal polytheism so the cursed one is the first disbeliever and the chief of the polytheists.

This summary of this question is that the Almighty Allah has said in Quran that Allah would not forgive one who associates others with Him and, excepting the sin of polytheism, He would forgive the sins of whomsoever He wishes.

Therefore, since Satan, in the beginning, only refused to prostrate for Adam, he had not associated anyone with God, that is, he had not committed polytheism; his sin is worth forgiveness.

The gist of the reply is that Satan was a disbeliever from the beginning and thereafter led man to disbelief and he also became a polytheist and encouraged people to various kinds of polytheism. From the very beginning till now, he has no faith in Allah. If it is said that Satan had accepted God and had believed in the Creator of the universe and that he only refused to obey His Commandment, then we reply that only to testify that there is a creator of the world of existence is not faith in Allah.

Faith in God means one must accept Allah as the creator, nourisher and upbringer of oneself and of every particle in the universe and also one must believe that he and all the things of the world are due to Allah only, and he should not consider himself and others as existing by themselves. He must also regard only Allah as worthy of worship. Thus he should surrender before only one God and to fear Him and to humble before Him. Only such a person is a believer in Allah.

Thus one who considers himself independent, like lblis, crosses the limits of being His servant and shows his own opinion, rather who considers his own opinion higher than the command of God and thus shows pride against God, has doubtlessly become a denier of God's Godship and Lordship and of His being the only deity worth worship. Such a person will not get a place except in Hell.

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ عَنْ عِبَادَتِي سَيَدْخُلُونَ جَهَنَّمَ دَاخِرِينَ {60}

"...surely those who are too proud for My service shall soon enter Hell abased. " (Al- Ghafir, 40:60)

Question 9

Q.9: It is said that in Ethereal Sphere (Aalame Zarr)9 the souls chose either righteousness or wretchedness. Now if it was forced, it is injustice and if it was volluntary, and if they possessed intelligence, how did they choose it? But if they had no sense, it would be improper to hold them accountable and to punish them. Please describe the circumstances in Ethereal Sphere (Aalame Zarr).

A: Allamah Majlisi (r.a.) has, in volume 3 of Biharul Anwar , quoted many narrations related to inborn human disposition (Teenat). Aalame Zarr and about taking of the covenant. It can be summarized as follows:

The Almighty created from the loins of His Eminence, Adam, the father of humanity, his progeny so that He may bring them out on Judgment Day in the form of particles as small as tiny ants. So in the beginning also they were like tiny ants. Thereafter the Almighty Allah connected their souls to their bodies. At that time also they possessed perfect wisdom and intelligence. They also had a perfectly free will.

Then, after taking covenant from them about His being only Allah One God and about His messengers and Imams (a.s.) He asked: “Am I not your Lord?" A number of them who were the right-siders, said obediently and enthusiastically: ''Yes of course," and thus they confessed and testified to the truth. The remaining, who were left-siders, hesitatingly and with disinclination said, 'Yes'. Then God took their test by bringing before them a fire. He ordered them to enter it. The former entered and the fire became cool for them. The remaining did not obey and did not enter and this test was taken thrice.

As regards the research and meaning of Teenat, Aalame Zarr and covenant, scholars of religion have three opinions:

The first is the school of traditionists who say that these traditions are ambiguous and to understand them is beyond us and it is enough to have faith in them and we should understand that the Imams (a.s.) know their meanings.

Another school of thought is that of Shaykh Mufeed, Sayyid Murtaza and Tabarsi, author of Majmaul Bayan and other commentators of Quran and their followers. They are of the opinion that traditions about Teenat and verses and narrations relating to covenant taking are figurative, allegoric and metaphoric with reference to the details mentioned in Sharh Kafi and Bihar; especially with regard to Aalame Zar, Shaykh Mufid (r.a.) says:

"The correct report is that the Almighty Allah brought out from the loins of Adam, his progeny like tiny ants and filled up the horizon therewith. Then He divided it into three pans. Some had effulgence (Noor) without darkness (Zulmat) and they were the selected ones who were pure of sins. Some were all darkness without light and they were the infidels who never did obey. Some others had a combination of both. They are those who obey and also disobey, among the believers.

The reason behind bringing out the progeny of Adam in this manner was that the Almighty Allah intended to introduce the numerosity of Adam's progeny to him and also to show His Might and Kingdom; to amaze him by His creation and to make him understand what was to happen after him. As regards the traditional reports containing the Almighty Allah's Words:

“am I not your lord...till the end”, its reply is that they are only solitary traditions and hence not quite reliable. On the contrary he says that they are forged.

Thereafter Shaykh Mufeed referred to the holy verse:

وَإِذْ أَخَذَ رَبُّكَ مِنْ بَنِي آدَمَ مِنْ ظُهُورِهِمْ ذُرِّيَّتَهُمْ وَأَشْهَدَهُمْ عَلَىٰ أَنْفُسِهِمْ أَلَسْتُ بِرَبِّكُمْ ۖ قَالُوا بَلَىٰ ۛ شَهِدْنَا ۛ أَنْ تَقُولُوا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِنَّا كُنَّا عَنْ هَٰذَا غَافِلِينَ

"And when your Lord brought forth from the children of Adam, from their backs, their descendants, and made them bear witness again.d their own souls: Am I not your Lord? They said: Yes! we bear witness. Lest you should say on the day of resurrection: Surely we were heedless of this.” (Al A’raaf, 7: 172)

Shaykh Mufeed said that this divine covenant was taken from the progeny of Adam whereby they admitted that Allah is the Creator of everything and that He is the Lord nourisher of everything and everyone and that He is the Only One God.

This truth, which all of them accepted was not merely a verbal covenant and it did not relate only to the time of Adam, the father of mankind. Rather it is a covenant, which is divinely created and which has remained with every human being along with his creation. In other words, the feeling of finding and knowing God and a capability to and readiness to accept the truth of God 's oneness and uniqueness is present in the soul of everyone right from their creation and this feeling about God 's existence is there in the mind of everyone as a self-understood matter. It is a divinely created instinct.

In this way, all human beings have the spirit of belief in only one God and a natural demand to worship only Him is made in the language of creation. Likewise, the answer to this question has also been in the same language. The summary of this question and answer and the covenant is a natural agreement, the signs of which are found by everyone even today in his or her heart.

So much so that modern psychologists too have found in their latest researches that religious awareness is innate in man which every human being finds in himself automatically. It is the same natural sense that has guided people to God throughout the ages. Every intelligent man who pays attention to his divinely bestowed instinct understands that he is a creation of a Creator and he is nourished by a nourisher and sustainer.

If you put something before a three or four-year-old child, he too, before extending h is hand, looks at the one who has placed that thing before him and as a result of his natural understanding follows that everything is brought by someone. There are many things in the Holy Quran and other texts which deal with questions and answers about man's natural faculties and abilities, which are omitted here due to exigency.

The third school of thought followed by many earlier and later day scholars says that all narrations about Teenat, Aalame Zarr and covenant are correct and their apparent meanings are also correct and there is no inconsistency between them and any logic or religious rules and principles.

If someone says that as a consequent of these narrations, one can say that there is compulsion in religion, because, in Aalame Zarr whatever a man accepted was involuntary, without an alternative, we reply that:

Firstly, whatever everyone confessed in that world was by his or her choice and understanding as said earlier. Rather some have even said that the wisdom of everyone in that world was greater than it is today.

Secondly, the tenor of the reports in this regard is that matters accepted in that world were never forced whereby in this facsimile world, everything must be accepted and acted upon. Rather it is possible that there may be a change as mentioned in a tradition in which Amirul Momineen (a.s.) is reported to have said:

"The Lord of the worlds stipulated change in destiny (Bada) in the left-sided folks."

That is, those who, in that world, willingly revolted and disobeyed became the left-sided folks. If they repent and obey the messengers of God, the Lord changes their destiny and places them among the right-sided folks as such a change is very much possible. That is why it is mentioned in the supplication of the holy month of Ramadan:

"If I am to be thrown into calamities, cancel my encounter with such misfortunes and write my name in the list of those who have been blessed to be fortunate, because You have said in Your Book:

يَمْحُو اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ ۖ وَعِنْدَهُ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ

"Allah makes to pass away and establishes what He pleases, and with Him is the basis of' the Book." (Ar- Ra’ad, 13:39)

As regards the question about their being intelligent and how they preferred to put themselves in a loss? We say that such exclamation is out of place, because it is often seen that many wise and intelligent people, in several matters, knowingly and voluntarily do things which harm them and thereafter repent for their misdeeds. Likewise, the accursed Satan knowingly and intentionally disobeyed God's command and refused to prostrate before Adam (a.s.).

Question 10: Where is the avenger of the martyrs of Kerbala?

Where is the avenger of the martyrs of Kerbala?10

Q.10: Mukhtar punished the killers of Imam Husain (a.s.) and their chastisement in the Hereafter is at the discretion of Allah. Would they become alive during the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) and bepunished for a second time?

A: According to the sayings of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), Imam Mahdi (a.s.) would kill those from the progeny of killers of His Eminence, Chief of Martyrs, Imam Husain (a.s.), who are pleased by the said killing and who pride upon the oppression committed by their forefathers and thus, are participants intentionally, verbally and actively. As regards the killers of the Imam (a.s.), we have not received solid proofs that they will be enlivened and taken revenge from, although it is mentioned in a number of traditions that during the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.), the Almighty Allah will enliven many disbelievers so that they may observe the kingdom of Aale Muhammad (a.s.) and that revenge may be taken from them.

It is possible that the killers of Imam Husain (a.s.) may also be among them. As regards the statement that Mukhtar has punished them, firstly, it is not certain that Mukhtar punished all of them. Maybe those who were not killed by Mukhtar may be killed by Imam Mahdi (a.s.). Secondly, we may say that there is no hindrance in the matter of making a dead one alive and then killing him in this world at the hands of Imam Mahdi (a.s.), because, it cannot be called sufficient even if the killers of a prophet or an Imam are killed a thousand times. As for the rule that a murder is punishable only by killing the murderer once it is so only because killing anyone a second time is not practicable in this world and not because he should be killed only once.

Hence there is no doubt that those killed by Mukhtar would again be killed by Imam Mahdi (a.s.) by the command of Allah and it will be perfect justice, but the actual point is that it is not quite certain and agreed upon, as mentioned earlier. For further details, please refer to Tafsir Burhan under the interpretation of the following verse:

وَمَنْ قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيِّهِ سُلْطَانًا فَلَا يُسْرِفْ فِي الْقَتْلِ ۖ إِنَّهُ كَانَ مَنْصُورًا

"...and whoever is slain unjustly, We have indeed given to his heir authority so let him not exceed the just limits in slaying; surely he is aided.” (Al Isra 17:33)

Question 11

Q.11: Please explain 'change of destiny' (Bada) in a convincing manner.

A: Change of destiny (Bada) in the created world is like the cancellation of decrees in the legal sense. Thus canceJlation of a legal command means withdrawal of the earlier order and establishment of another due to a change in divine strategy.

Likewise, Bada means change made by God in the affairs of His servants through change in strategy like removal of a calamity as a result of supplication or charity extension in lifespan because of good behavior with relatives etc. For example, the calamity which had befallen the community of Prophet Yunus (a.s.) was removed due to its earnest supplications.

According to a narration in Biharul Anwar, Imam Sadiq (a.s.) is reported to have said that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said: Verily a person behaves nicely with his relatives as a result of which the Almighty Allah makes the remainder of three years in his lifespan into thirty years. It also so happens that a person behaves badly with his relations and as a result, the Almighty Allah turns the remainder of thirty years of his life into only three years. Then he (s.a.w.s.) said:

يَمْحُو اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ

"Allah makes to pass away and establishes what He pleases ...” (Ar-Ra’ad, 13:39)

It is also mentioned in Biharul Anwar, Vol. 17, that Amirul Momineen (a.s.) said: The number of death due to abundance of sins are more than deaths due to the arrival of the appointed day and the number of persons living as a result of good deeds is more than the lives reaching their destined lifespans.11 Making changes in the destiny of man due to his deeds is one of the honors of the Almighty Allah, concerning His Lordship and sovereignty. It also leads people to turn earnestly to Him and to perform good deeds. Therefore, the Holy Imams (a.s.) have accorded much importance to it.

Imam Baqir (a.s.) is reported to have said that God has not been worshipped through anything like belief in Bada ; that is, they have considered trust in Bada a great belief. It is also said in another narration that God has not considered anything greater than belief in Bada.

It is mentioned in Al-Kafi that Imam Baqir (a.s.) said that God did not appoint any messenger unless and until He took covenant from him on three matters:

1. His worship

2. Belief in His oneness and uniqueness

3. Belief that He advances whatever He wishes and delays whatever He likes.12

It is also mentioned in Al-Kafi that Imam Sadiq (a.s.) said:

"If people knew how much reward is there in the belief in Bada, they would not tire talking about it."13

As regards the reason of naming it as Bada, it denotes manifestation of a thing after its remaining hidden. It does not mean that the Almighty Allah changed the destiny because He was wrong the first time (God forbid!) So whenever He makes a change in affairs of any of His servants, it is said: Bada has occurred; that is, what was hidden has now become manifest.

In other words, God made manifest what was hidden to people because of absence of information about the causes. This is also the aim of Imam Sadiq 's (a.s.) saying:

“Allah has not manifested anything as He manifested in the case of Ismail, (who was son of the Imam)."

This is a hint to another tradition which says: It was decreed for Ismail to be killed twice. Then I requested the Lord to remove the calamity and He removed his assassination."

Question 12

Q.12: Blackness and whiteness, blindness and sight, ugliness and beauty, wisdom and lunacy; these things show lack of justice. The ugly one and the blind is deprived of many bounties of this world and such persons can perform fewer good deeds. Will they be compensated in the Hereafter? Would they be punished if they die as infidels? Should they be losers in both the worlds?

A: Difference in the creation of men, like deformity and beauty, perfection in stature and defects therein as well as all other drawbacks like poverty and wealth, health and illness etc. All these things carry wisdom and strategies behind them. Here we shall mention some of them:

Firstly: Things are known by their opposite. If there is no ugliness, how will one understand beauty? If there is no perfection, defectiveness will never be recognized and so on.

Secondly: Such differences are there so that the overall might of God may be manifested: that He is powerful over everything. In certain cases, this difference is to show God 's kindness or anger.

Thirdly: For some persons, their benefit lies in ugliness or blindness or, for instance, poverty and illness etc. If they really come to know the truth behind everything, they would prefer what Allah has destined for them.

It is narrated that one of the prophets was walking near the banks of a river when he observed some children; among whom was a blind child and other children were harassing him. Sometimes they also forced the blind child's head in water. That prophet was moved and he prayed to the Almighty Allah to bestow sight to that blind boy. His prayer was answered and the blind boy was given sight. But after that he began to drown the other children right away. The prophet exclaimed: "My Lord, You know the best! Please return him to his earlier condition." There are many examples testifying to this truth.

Fourthly: Differences between people are for their test and for manifestation of their righteousness and wickedness, because the afflicted are being tested in the matter of patience and submission to the will of God and thereby they are raised to the status of patient ones and those who are given bounties and abilities are tested in the matter of thankfulness and obedience to God with regard to their behavior with the disabled. It is, therefore, said:

وَجَعَلْنَا بَعْضَكُمْ لِبَعْضٍ فِتْنَةً أَتَصْبِرُونَ

"...and We have made some of you a trial for others; will you bear patiently?' " (Al Furqan, 25:20)

As regards compensation of depravities, there is no doubt that such compensation will be made fully and in a nice way. One of the beautiful names of God is Jabbar, meaning: The Compensator. It is an established principle in religious philosophy that Almighty Allah compensates for every trouble, hardship, calamity and deprivation in proportion to the person’s contentment with divine will. But of course, this applies only to things, which are only from Allah, having no interference of anyone else.

It is narrated in Al- Kafi under the chapter of "Distress of the faithful" that lbne Abi Ya'fur once complained to Imam Sadiq (a.s.) about the pains, which he was suffering continuously. Imam (a.s.) replied:

··o Abdullah, if a believer comes to know the quantum of reward for a pain and calamity, he would wish to be shredded into pieces. "14

It is mentioned volume 11 of Biharul Anwar that Abu Basir, a visually challenged gentleman, once came to Imam Baqir (a.s.) and asked: "Is it true that you can enliven the dead and cure a leper?" The Imam replied: "Yes, by the command of Allah." Abu Basir asked the Imam to cure his blindness.

Imam (a.s.) said: Come near me. Then he passed his holy hand over Abu Basir's eyes and the latter was able to see. He said: "Now I can see everything."

Imam (a.s.) asked: "Would you like to remain like this (and get worldly benefits) and be Iikc others (bearing pains and hardshi s of Hereafter) or you would wish to return to your earlier condition and enter Paradise without accounting for anything?"

Abu Basir replied: "I prefer blindness," and the Imam returned him to his earlier state.

This tradition shows that in lieu of the trouble of blindness in this world, one will be spared hardships of accounting of life­ long deeds in the Hereafter.

It is also mentioned in many narrations that on Judgment Day, the Most Merciful God will show sympathy to those who suffered in the world and whose prayers were not answered due to some strategy and He would tell them: "'Today, I will give you whatever you ask for." The compensation will be so generous that everyone would wish that none of his wishes had been fulfilled in the world.

As regards the fate of those who were deprived due to general strategy of the world or for some special strategy, and who also died in a state of infideli ty; that can they be called as losers in both the world?

Our reply is: Since deprivation of such persons from divine compensation in the other world is because of their voluntary disbelief, this matter is out of question as a disbeliever has no share in the Hereafter.

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَظْلِمُ النَّاسَ شَيْئًا وَلَٰكِنَّ النَّاسَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ يَظْلِمُونَ

"Surely Allah does not do any injustice to men, but men are unjust to themselves. " (Surah Yunus, I 0:44)

Question 13

Q.13: Two righteous people live in this world, one for 30 years and another for 60. The first objects to God: Why could I not remain alive longer like my brother in order to worship more and earn more reward...? What is the answer?

A: More or less of deeds is from the viewpoint of either quantity: such as one remains awake for a year engaging oneself in ritual prayer, recitations and also fasts during days and utilizes his wealth to fulfill only his genuine needs and donates the rest to charity; or it is from the viewpoint of quality.

For example, one only offers the obligatory evening and night prayer with full concentration, humility, fear and respect, and then he goes to sleep. Such prayer is of course better than one that does not have these qualities though one may remain engaged in prayer all night. It is mentioned in Biharul Anwar that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said:

"Two units of ritual prayer offered with sincerity are better than a whole night of worship."15

Moreover, the deed of one who has more piety is higher in quality; and more likely to be granted a greater reward. There are many examples of this.

After this preface, we can say that it is possible that one who had a lifespan of only thirty years, but he spent his life in worship; he may have got more good sense whereby his deeds might have become better than one who lived for sixty years. Therefore, there is no scope of such a doubt.

Second reply: It is possible that one lives and worships for thirty years and then God makes him die in such conditions that had he lived longer, he would have faced such trials and hardships and changes in life, whereby it would not have been possible for him to perform more good deeds; on the contrary he would have been likely to lose whatever good he had earned and, finally, on Judgment Day he might have realized that his death at that time was a great and special mercy of God on him. Thus there is no scope to ask why he did not get a longer life.

Third reply: It is also possible that one, who was to live more, used his freedom badly and committed evil deeds like cruelty with relatives or false witnessing etc., thereby inviting a cut in his destined age. Likewise, it is also possible that one who got a sixty-year life earned that extension because of good deeds which cause a longer lifespan. Imam Sadiq (a.s.) is responded to have said: "Those who die due to sins are more than those who die because of destined death. Likewise those who live because of good deeds are more than those who live due to destined life."16

On Judgment Day, all realities would become evident and then there will be no scope for such questions.

Question 14

Q.14: After being driven out how did Satan enter Paradise and misguide Adam? If he could enter Paradise, he was not accursed and if he entered in the form of a snake or through any other trick, then God did not drive him away.

A: The garden wherein Adam and Hawwa stayed and where Satan misguided Adam was not the everlasting Paradise (Jannat-e- Khuld), which is promised to the obedient servants of God. So it is useless to ask how the devil entered it. Shaykh Kulaini and Shaykh Sadooq have narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) that the garden in which Adam and Hawwa lived was a garden of this world where sun and moon rose and set. Had it been the Paradise of the Hereafter or had it been the promised Paradise, Adam would not have been driven out of it.

As regards what is said about the arrival of Satan in the form of serpent or in the mouth of a snake, it is incorrect and such rumors are worth less although some have considered them allegorical. For more detail s refer to Tafsir al-Mizan

Question 15

Q.15: ls the present Satan the very first original Satan or he has progeny and descendents? If he has, why God created other satans from the one which was already condemned?

A: Yes, Satan is the same original Satan who is named Iblis and who is to survive till Judgment Day.

قَالَ فَإِنَّكَ مِنَ الْمُنْظَرِينَ

إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْوَقْتِ الْمَعْلُومِ

“ He said: So surely you are of the respited ones. Till the period of the time made known.” (Al Hijr, 15:37-38)

Also he has very many children and progeny as mentioned in the Holy Quran:

أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ أَوْلِيَاءَ

"...would you then take him and his offspring for friends ...” (Al Kahf, 1 8:49)

And He also says:

إِنَّهُ يَرَاكُمْ هُوَ وَقَبِيلُهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا تَرَوْنَهُمْ ۗ

"...he surely sees you, he as well as his host from whence you cannot see them ...” (Al- A’raaf 7:27)

As for the reason of creation of satans and infidels, it is the goodness of creation and imminent invention. On the contrary to refrain from it is stopping of grace and hence undesirable in every condition. What is ready and worthy of coming into existence, Allah would bring it into existence. But the wicked aspects, which arise from some creations like satans and infidels is due to their wrongful choice and, therefore, the condemnation is related to them and not to their Creator.

In other words He created satans and infidels and gave them freedom of choice and also made them responsible, informing them of the things, which would benefit them, but they disobeyed Him and made themselves deprived of good and became sources of mischieves. Thus, whatever is from Allah is all good and nice and whatever is condemnable is from the creatures themselves.

If it is said: What is the wisdom of accepting this origin and what is the benefit in creation of satans? We may reply: One of the wisdoms behind it, is the coming out of some righteous and faithful persons from their progeny like Haam bin Heern. It is obvious that even if only one true believer is born, it is enough to achieve the aim of creation.

It is mentioned in Al-Kafi that if not more than one single believer person is there on the earth, it is sufficient. One of the wisdoms behind the creation of satans is the huge benefit which the believers get by not paying attention to deceptions and doubts raised by them. First ly: satans are means, through which you can differentiate between a righteous and a corrupt character. It is said:

وَمَا كَانَ لَهُ عَلَيْهِمْ مِنْ سُلْطَانٍ إِلَّا لِنَعْلَمَ مَنْ يُؤْمِنُ بِالْآخِرَةِ مِمَّنْ هُوَ مِنْهَا فِي شَكٍّ

"And he has no authority over them, but that We may distinguish him who. believes in the hereafter from him who is in doubt concerning it..." (As-Saba, 34:21)

Secondly, deceptions of satans cause the believer to earn divine grace and salvation if he opposes them. On the contrary, such a person attains a rank higher than that of angels.

Question 16

Q.16: Kindly explain the difference between the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mahfooz) and the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) and also between destiny (Taqdeer) and free will (Tadbeer). Are supplications and devotions effective in destined matters?

A: Scholars have made deep studies in the matter of the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Ma/ooz) and the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat). One of them, Allamah Tabarsi (a.r.) says in Sharhe Usul Kafi: Verses of Quran and traditions prove that the Almighty Allah has created two tablets and recorded in them whatever takes place.

The first is the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mafooz) wherein there is no change under any circumstances and it is according to the knowledge of the Almighty Allah. Another tablet is the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) wherein He records one thing and then erases it through many exigencies and strategies which are not concealed from the wise.

For example, He records in it the age of Zaid as 50 years, that is, it is according to strategy that he should live for fifty years, provided he does not do anything which increases or decreases one's lifespan. Then if he behaves nicely with his relatives, Allah erases '50' and writes '60' and if he disregards the rights of his blood relatives '50' is turned to '40'. But in the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mahfooz) it is mentioned what has to happen. For instance, if Zaid or Hasan behaves nicely with his relatives, which cause increase in lifespan, from the very beginning, what is recorded in lauhe Mahfooz is 60. And he willfully behaves badly with relatives, the figure of 40 is there already fixed in lauhe Mahfooz.

Summarily speaking, there never occurs any change in Lauhe Mahfooz; on the contrary what is going to happen, is from the very beginning recorded in it. Of course, changes are possible in lauhe Mahwo Athhaat question, which is called as modified destiny (Bada) (This was discussed in the related question).

If it is asked what is the use of Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) if whatever is to happen, is already recorded in Protected Tablet (lauhe Mahfooz)?

We reply: There are many things of wisdom. Allamah Majlisi has written some of them incling the one that there are angels who write the tablets. Those who come to know about that tablet by the Grace of Almighty Allah Lord concerning His servant after the Messengers and Imams know about them, they inform God 's servants about the same saying that your good deeds have such effects and also that their misdeeds also can cause harm to you. Certainly such information make the believers attend good deeds and refrain from bad ones.

Among the deeds which can change the things destined in Tablet of erasing and writing (lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) are charities and supplications. That is why much emphasis is put on these two things in related traditions and verses. Here we suffice with only one tradition of Al- Kaji under the Chapter of supplication wards off calamities and death".

It is narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) that he said:

"Verily supplication erases destiny and breaks it into pieces just as a rope is broken into pieces after it was wound tightly."17

It means that a thing which had been firmly fixed in destiny is erased through supplication, just as in the case of the people of Prophet Yunus (a.s.) a calamity which had came very near to them was deferred due to the earnest prayers and collective supplications offered sincerely by that community.

Notes

1. Usul Kafi , Vol. 2 , Pg. 452; Biharul Anwar, Vol. 73, Pg. 387

2. Usul Kafi, Vol.1 pg.160, Tr.13

3. Nahjul Balagha, Subhi Salih, Saying no. 250, Pg. 511

4. Mafatihul Jinan, Post Prayer Recitation of Asr Prayer

5. Further details about the ‘weak’ are given in reply to question 34 which may be referred to

6. Further details about the 'weak ' are given in reply to question 34 which may be referred to.

7. Usul Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 93-94

8. Usul Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 97

9. Initial stage of creation; in which human beings existed only as spirits. (Aalam=world, Zar=particle)

10. Mafatihul Jinan, Dua Nudbah

11. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 78, Pg 83

12. Al-Kafi, Vol. I , Pg. l 46 [Allah is not worshipped as much as He is worshipped through the beli ef i n Bada ] J n the same source it is mentioned that the Al mighty A llah is not exalted by anything as much as He is exalted through belief in Boda.

And in Biharul Anwar, Vol. 27, Pg. 286 i t is narrated from Imam Muham mad Baq ir (a.s.) that he said: A11ah did not send any prophet except that he made the people swear to three points: Belief in Allah, in His oneness and belief that He post pones and advances whatever He likes.

13. Al- Kafi. Vol. I, Pg. 148

14. Al-Kafi, Vol. 3, Pg. 354

15. Biharul Anwar. Vol. 84, Pg. 264

16. Biharul Anwar , Vo l. 83, Pg. 354

17. Al- Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 2 15