180 Questions Enquiries About Islam Volume Two: Various issues Volume 2

180 Questions Enquiries About Islam Volume Two: Various issues0%

180 Questions Enquiries About Islam Volume Two: Various issues Author:
: Sayyid Husain Husaini
Translator: Shaykh Shahnawaz Mahdavi
Publisher: The Islamic Education Board of the World Federation of KSIMC
Category: Various Books

180 Questions Enquiries About Islam Volume Two: Various issues

Author: Ayatullah Makarim Shirazi
: Sayyid Husain Husaini
Translator: Shaykh Shahnawaz Mahdavi
Publisher: The Islamic Education Board of the World Federation of KSIMC
Category:

visits: 8001
Download: 3612


Comments:

Volume 1 Volume 2
search inside book
  • Start
  • Previous
  • 53 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 8001 / Download: 3612
Size Size Size
180 Questions Enquiries About Islam Volume Two: Various issues

180 Questions Enquiries About Islam Volume Two: Various issues Volume 2

Author:
Publisher: The Islamic Education Board of the World Federation of KSIMC
English

15. What is Islam’s perspective with regards to Jabr (compulsion) and Ikhtiyar (free-choice)?

This problem is an ancient issue that had been the bone of contention of scholars; a group advocating freedom of will while another supporting compulsion and each of them presenting proofs to substantiate their viewpoints.

But interestingly, in practice, both these groups have formally recognized and accepted the notion of choice and freedom of will. In other words all these debates are only within the periphery of theoretical discussion and not in practice, clearly revealing that the concept of freedom of will is inherent to every person. And were it not for the various insinuations and whisperings, everybody would have supported this concept.

This general conscience and universal innate - one of the most lucid of all the proofs for ikhtiyar (freedom of choice) - manifests itself in various forms in man's life; if man considered himself to be compelled in the performance of his deeds and to not possess any choice, why is it that: At times, as a result of performance or non-performance of an act, man experiences a sense of regret, and resolves to utilize his experience in the future. This state of regret occurs numerously for those who advocate the concept of jabr (compulsion); if there is no ikhtiyar, why this rue and remorse?

Everyone rebukes and censures the evil-doers; if there is jabr, why should they be rebuked in such a manner?

Those who do good deeds are praised and commended?

Everyone strives to educate their children in order that they become successful and fortunate; if everyone is compelled (in the performance of his deeds); what is the point in educating them?

All the scholars, without exception, exert themselves for the purpose of raising the standard of ethics in society?

Man expresses repentance over his blunders; if the concept of jabr is accepted, repentance becomes meaningless.

Man rues his shortcomings; why?

Universally, the criminals are subjected to trials and are exposed to intense interrogation; are these acts that are beyond one's choice and free-will and need no interrogation and trials?

All over the world and within all communities - irrespective of whether they are materialists or Allah-worshippers - punishments have been prescribed for the criminals. But are these punishments for acts that they were compelled to perform?!

When someone transgresses upon their interests, even the advocates of the doctrine of jabr clamour for justice and, considering him to be guilty, drag him to the courts of law!

In short, if man truly had no choice of his own, what could repentance possibly mean? Why then the reproach and censure? Can one, whose hands and feet tremble involuntarily, be rebuked and criticized?

Why are those, who perform good acts, praised and encouraged? But do they possess choice of their own that they shall continue their good acts as a result of this encouragement?

Basically, with the acknowledgement of the influence of education, the concept of jabr breaks down. In addition, issues related to ethics, without acknowledging the concept of freedom of will, become totally meaningless.

If we are compelled in our acts, what is the meaning of repentance? Why should one yearn and rue? Placing a compelled person on trial is one of the most oppressive of acts, and punishing him is worse.

All these indicate that the concept of freedom of will is inherent to all humans, and in accordance with the conscience of the entire mankind. It is not just the general public, but even the learned class, the philosophers and the proponents of jabr too, in practice, accept ikhtiyar.

اأَلْجَبَرِرِيُّونَ اإِخْتِيَارِِيُّيُونَ مِنْ حَيْثُ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ !

“Those, who profess the doctrine of 'jabr' are, (in practice) the proponents of the doctrine of 'ikhtiyar', but only they realize it not.”

It is interesting to note that the Noble Qur’an has repeatedly emphasized this issue too. In verse 39 of Suratul Naba it says:

فَمَنْ شَآءَ اتَّخَذَ إِلـى‏ رَبِّهِ مَآباً

“So whoever desires may take refuge with his Lord.”

In other verses too great emphasis has been laid upon man's will, and since mentioning all of them would only serve to prolong the discussion, we shall content ourselves by presenting only two verses below:

إِنَّا هَدَيْنَاهُ السَّبِيلَ إِمَّا شَاكِراً وَ إِمَّا كَفُوراً

“Surely We have shown him the way: he may be thankful or unthankful.” 1

فَمَنْ شَاءَ فَلْيُؤْمِنْ وَ مَنْ شَآءَ فَلْيَكْفُرْ إِنَّا أَعْتَدْنَا لِلظَّالِمِينَ نَارًا

“So let him who please believe, and let him who please disbelieve; surely We have prepared for the iniquitous a fire.” 2

The discussion regarding this issue is a very protracted one with numerous books and articles having been written in this regard. What has been mentioned has just been a superficial glance at the issue from the standpoint of the conscience and the Noble Qur’an. We continue our discussion by mentioning one important point:

Support for the issue of jabr, on the part of a group of people, did not arise only due to philosophical problems; rather, important psychological and social factors undoubtedly contributed to the birth and continuation of this belief.

Many of those, who have accepted the belief of jabr, predestination or 'qadha and qadr' (fate and destiny, but with the attribute of compulsion attached to them), have done so in order to escape the burden of responsibilities or to cover up their failures, which have been a consequence of their own shortcomings and negligence, or to provide for themselves a covering for their wild carnal desires (They would state: Allah (s.w.t.) knew from pre-eternity that we would consume wine; and we consume wine now in order that Allah's (s.w.t.) knowledge does not become ignorance!)

At times the colonialist powers, in order to suppress the resistance of the people and put out the flames of anger of the nations, would make themselves dominant over the others by making use of this doctrine. They used to say: 'Your fate, from the very beginning, had been ordained to be this; where is there any alternative except submission and happiness (over our dominance)?

By accepting this doctrine all the deeds of the criminals and the sins of the sinners would become justified and there would be no difference between an offender and an obedient person.3

The verse:

وَ مَا رَبُّكَ بِظَلاَّمٍ لِلْعَبِيدِ

“And your Lord is not in the least unjust to the servants” 4

is a clear proof with regards to the issue of ikhtiyar and freedom of will, and is illustrative of this reality that Allah (s.w.t.) neither punishes anyone inexplicably nor does He increase the punishment of anyone unwarrantedly. His work is absolute justice; this is so since oppression stems from shortcomings, deficiencies, ignorance, unawareness or carnal desires, and His Holy Essence is free from all of these.

Qur’an, in its manifest verses, simultaneous to pronouncing the doctrine of jabr - which is a source of dissemination of wickedness, an approval for various kinds of evils, and a tool for the rejection of every kind of obligation and responsibility - as being incorrect, considers each person to be answerable for his own deeds and is of the view that the consequences of every person's deeds would be directed towards that person himself.

And hence we read in a tradition that one of companions Imam 'Ali ibne Musa al-Ridha (a.s.) asked:

هَلْ يَجْبُرُ اللٌّهُ عِبَادَهُ عَلى الْـمَعَاصِي؟

“Does Allah (s.w.t.) compel His servants to commit sins?”

فَقَالَ: بَلْ يُخَيِّرُهُمْ وَ يُـمَهِّلُهُمْ حَتَّـى يَتُوبُوا

Whereupon he (a.s.) replied: “No. Rather, he gives them the choice and respites them until they repent.”

The companion persisted:

فَهَلْ يُكَلِّفُ عِبَادَهُ مَا لاَ يَطِيقُونَ‏؟

“Does He place upon them obligations that are beyond their ability to perform?”

The Imam (a.s.) said:

كَيْفَ يَفْعَلُ ذٌلِكَ وَ هُوَ يَقُولُ: وَ مَا رَبُّكَ بِظَلاَّمٍ لِلْعَبِيدِ

“How can He do such a thing when He Himself has said (in the Qur’an) 'And your Lord is not in the least unjust to the servants?'”

The Imam (a.s.) then adds: My father Musa ibne Ja'far (a.s.) narrates from his father Ja'far ibne Muhammad (a.s.) that: “One, who is of the belief that Allah (s.w.t.) compels His servants into committing sins or places upon them obligations that are beyond their ability (to perform), do not eat the meat of the animal slaughtered by such a person, do not accept his testimony, do not offer prayers behind him and do not give him anything from the zakat! (In short, do not apply the laws of Islam to him).5

The above tradition implicitly alludes to this subtle point that the doctrine of jabr originates from the concept of 'obligation that cannot be performed'; this is because if, on the one hand, man is compelled into committing sins while on the other hand, he is prohibited from it, this becomes a clear case of placing an obligation that cannot to be performed.6

In verse 29 of Suratul Insan, we recite:

إِنَّ هٌذِهِ تَذْكِرَةٌ فَمَنْ شَآءَ اتَّخَذَ إِلـى‏ رَبِّهِ سَبِيلاً

“Surely this is a reminder, so whoever pleases takes to his Lord a way.”

And since it was possible that narrow-minded individuals might have interpreted the above expression to mean absolute and unqualified tafwidh (entrusting to Allah), the next verse goes on to say:

وَ مَا تَشَآؤُوْنَ إِلاَّ أَنْ يَشَآءَ اللٌّهُ‏

“And you do not please except that Allah please.”

And finally says:

إِنَّ اللٌّهَ كَانَ عَلِيماً حَكِيماً

“Surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.”

And this, in reality, is establishing the well-known belief of:

أَلأَمْرُ بَيْنَ الأَمْرَينِ

“The (actual) issue is that which lies between the two (extreme) issues of total compulsion and total freedom.”

On the one hand it says: “Allah (s.w.t.) has shown the way and selecting it is upon you. On the other hand it adds: Your selection is dependent upon the Will of Allah (s.w.t.). This means that you do not possess absolute freedom and independence; rather, your strength, power and freedom of will are entirely from Allah (s.w.t.) and by His Will and permission; the moment He desires, He can take away this strength and freedom from you.”

As such, neither is it tafwidh and unqualified entrusting, nor is it compulsion; rather, it is a subtle reality that lies between these two. In other words it is a kind of freedom, which is related to Allah's (s.w.t.) Will such that He can take it away as and when He desires so that the people can carry the burden of responsibility - which is actually the secret of their achieving perfection - upon their shoulders, while at the same time, not envisage themselves as being independent of Allah (s.w.t.).

In short, this expression is for the purpose that the people do not regard themselves as being independent of the guidance, support, grace and blessings of Allah (s.w.t.) but, during decision-making, entrust themselves to Him and place themselves under His support,.

It thus becomes clear that the reason some of the commentators, who advocate the doctrine of jabr - like Fakhr Razi - have adhered to this verse is due to the preconceived views which they had harboured in connection with the issue. Fakhr Razi says:

وَ اعْلَمْ إِنَّ هَذِهِ الْآيَةَ مِنْ جُمْلَةِ الآيَاتِ الَّتِيْ تَلاَطَمَتْ فِيْهَا أَمْوَاجُ الْجَبْرِ وَ الْقَدْرِ

“Do know that this verse is one of the verses which indicate upon 'jabr' and predestination!”7

Yes, if we were to extricate this verse from the verses previous to it, there would be room for this delusion; however, in view of the fact that in one verse the effect of ikhtiyar has been mentioned while in the other verse the effect of Allah's Will, the issue of:

أَلأَمْرُ بَيْنَ الأَمْرَينِ

is quite plainly established.

Incredibly, the advocates of tafwidh cling on to that very verse, which speaks of total freedom of choice whereas the proponents of jabr adhere to that very verse, which speaks only of jabr - each of them wanting to justify their preconceived opinions by means of the respective verses. However, the correct comprehension of Allah's (s.w.t.) speech (or any other speech for that matter) demands that all the verses be placed alongside each other and then, without prejudices and prejudgments, the judgment should take place.

It is likely that the last part of the verse which states….

إِنَّ اللٌّهَ كَانَ عَلِيماً حَكِيماً

“Surely Allah (s.w.t.) s Knowing, Wise.”

also alludes to this meaning. This is because the Knowledge and Wisdom of Allah (s.w.t.) necessitate that the people be left free in journeying the path towards perfection; for if it were not so, the perfection that is imposed would not be perfection at all. Besides, His knowledge and wisdom does not permit Him to compel some into performing good deeds and others into committing evil acts, and later reward the first group and punish the second.8

Notes

1. Suratul Insan (76), Verse 3

2. Suratul Kahf (18), Verse 29

3. Tafsir-e-Namuna, vol. 26, pg. 64

4. Suratul Fussilat (41), Verse 46

5. 'Uyun Akhbar al-Ridha, as quoted in Tafsir Nurul Thaqalain, vol. 4, pg. 555

6. Tafsir-e-Namuna, vol. 20, pg. 308

7. Commentary of Fakhr Razi, vol. 30, pg. 262

8. Tafsir-e-Namuna, vol. 25, pg. 385

16. Is the theory of evolution inconsistent with theism?

The Qur’an contains a concise discussion in connection with the creation of man which it has presented in a nutshell since its prime aim had been issues that were educative in essence. This topic has been presented in numerous places in the Qur’an such as Suratul Sajdah, Suratul Mu’minun, Surat Sad and some other chapters.

However, we do know that the Qur’an is not a book of natural sciences but rather, a book for human development, and hence it should not be expected that details of these sciences such as issues relating to evolution, anatomy, embryology, botany and the like should be contained within it; nevertheless, it is quite acceptable that in relevance to educative discussions, brief allusions are made to different aspects of these sciences in the Qur’an.

Having taking this into consideration, there are two discussions which we consider essential to present before you:

1. Evolution of species from the scientific point of view.

2. Evolution of species from the Qur’anic point of view.

At the outset, we shall pursue the first topic and discuss the issue without reference to the verses and the traditions, only taking into consideration the criteria associated with the natural sciences:

We know that amongst scholars in this field there are two theories that are prevalent in connection with the creation of the living entities, irrespective of whether they are plants or animals:

The theory of evolution, which states that in the beginning, the various living entities did not possess the form that they presently possess, rather, the beginning of entities started with a single cell, which came into being as a result of mutation amid mud and slime, in the depths of the oceans; some non-living entities found themselves in special conditions and from them came into existence the first living cells.

These microscopic entities gradually underwent evolution - changing forms from one species to another, and shifting from the seas to the wild and from there to the air - and in this fashion, various species of plants, land and sea animals, and birds came into existence.

The most perfect and complete link in this process of evolution are the humans of today, who have manifested themselves in this present form - (evolving) initially from entities that resembled the monkeys and then from monkeys that resembled humans.

The theory of constancy of species, which states that every species of animal, from the very onset, manifested separately in the same form that they presently possess and there has occurred no transformation of any species into another. And hence, quite naturally, man too possessed an independent creation and from the very beginning had been created in this form.

Scholars of both the groups have written numerous books trying to establish their viewpoint, and this issue has been a subject of great dispute in scholastic circles.

These battles intensified from the time of Lamarck (the renowned French zoologist, who lived in the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century) and later Darwin - the English zoologist who, in the 19th century, presented his views in connection with the evolution of species with fresh proofs and arguments.

However, there is no doubt that in circles of natural sciences, most of the scholars today support the theory of evolution.

Arguments of the Proponents of Evolution

Their arguments can be summarized into three kinds:

The first of their claims is related to paleontology - the study of fossils of erstwhile living animals. They are of the opinion that studies conducted in connection with the various layers of earth reveal that living entities changed their forms from simple to more intricate and perfect forms, and there is only one way to explain these variations in the fossils - and that is the theory of evolution.

Their second argument is a clue which they have collected from comparative anatomy. In the course of lengthy discussions, they state: When the frame-work of various dissected animals are placed for comparison, great resemblances are seen to exist between them, which indicates that all of them have been derived from one origin and source.

And finally, their third argument is based upon a finding that they have procured from embryology. They are of the opinion that if the animals, while they are suntil embryos within the mother or inside the egg and have not seen the necessary development stages, are placed alongside each other, they shall be observed to possess great resemblances amongst themselves. This fact also emphasizes that in the beginning all of them come from one source and origin.

Answers of the Advocates of 'Constancy of Species'

However, the supporters of the theory of 'constancy of species' state one general answer for all the above statements and that is:

None of the above arguments are convincing. Of course, it cannot be denied the each of the above three claims do justify the probability of evolution as a conjectural probability, however, they can never induce certainty and conviction within us with respect to this issue.

To put it clearly, proving the theory of evolution and converting it from a mere theory into an indisputable scientific law should either take place by means of rational proof or by means of sense, tests and experiments - there exists no third alternative.

However, on the one hand we do know that there is no room for rational proofs with respect to such issues, while on the other, experimenting in connection with issues, whose roots exist millions of years in the past, is something that is not feasible!

What we perceive by means of sense and experiments is that with the passage of time, as a result of mutation, superficial changes do take place within animals and plants. For example, from one breed of ordinary sheep suddenly a breed of sheep is born whose wool, in terms of softness and delicacy, varies greatly from that of ordinary sheep - this being the origin of a new breed of sheep by the name of merino, possessing these exceptional characteristics in their wool.

Or animals, as a result of mutation, develop a change in the colour of the eyes, nails or the structure of their skin - and other such changes.

However, as yet, no one has ever witnessed a mutation that has caused an important alteration in the essential organs of the body of an animal, or transformed one species into another.

Thus, we can only speculate that successive mutations could, one day, possibly cause a change in the species of animals and, for example, transform a reptile into a bird. Nevertheless, this speculation is not a conclusive supposition but only one conjectural issue. This is because we have never encountered - neither by our sense nor by experiments - mutations that alter the essential organs of the body.

From what has been stated above we conclude that the triple arguments propounded by the advocates of evolution cannot carry this theory beyond its theoretical concept, and it is for this reason that those who discuss these issues always refer to it as 'theory' of evolution of species, and never refer to it as a law or a rule.

The Theory of Evolution and 'Theism'

Many people claim that this theory is inconsistent with theism and God-worship, and probably, from one angle, there might be some truth in what they claim. This is because, with the advent of Darwinism, there commenced an intense battle between the Church on the one hand and the supporters of this theory on the other, and due to political and social reasons a wide-spread propaganda was initiated stating that Darwinism was not consistent with theism.

However, today, it is clear for us that there exists no inconsistency between them, i.e. irrespective of whether we accept the theory of evolution or reject it due to lack of proof, we can suntil be believers in God.

Even if we assume that the Theory of Evolution of Species is established, all it would do is to take the form of a scientific rule that has manifested for us a natural cause and effect phenomenon - one, which shall be no different from the cause-effect relationship existing in the animal world and between other entities. Are the discoveries of natural causes that lead to rainfall, the tides of the seas, or the earthquakes an impediment in acquiring awareness of God? Surely not! Similarly, the discovery of an evolutionary relationship between the various species does not create any obstacle in the way of developing the cognizance of God.

Only those, who imagined that the discovery of natural causes does not run in harmony with the belief in the existence of God, can state such things. Today, however, we comprehend that not only do the discoveries of these causes not harm monotheism and Unity (of Allah (s.w.t.) ), but instead, they provide us with fresh proofs (related to the system of creation), regarding the existence of God.

Interestingly, Darwin himself, in the face of allegations of heresy, explicitly expresses in his book On The Origin of Species that 'As I accept the (theory of) evolution of species, I also believe in God; fundamentally, justifying and explaining evolution is not possible without (first) acknowledging the existence of God.'

Reflect on this statement: Despite acknowledging the influence of natural causes for the manifestation of various species of animals, he continued to believe in the One God, and gradually, as he grew older, the intensity of a special internal feeling that perceived the presence of a superhuman Power increased to such an extent within him that he realized that the conundrum of creation would remain unfathomable for man.1

Essentially, he was of the opinion that the manner in which the species are guided and led through the strange twists of evolution and the transformation of an extremely simple living entity into all these various and different species of animals, without the existence of a calculated plan, and without the means of a Universal Intelligence, is impossible!

And truly, it is exactly so! Is it possible to bring forth from one single, extremely primitive substance all these strange and mind-boggling derivatives - each of which portray extensive organization - without resorting to a source of infinite Knowledge and Power?

In conclusion: The uproar that the Theory of Evolution is in disagreement with the issue of theism and God-worship is one which is baseless and unsubstantiated (irrespective of whether we accept the Theory of Evolution or not).

The only question that remains to be answered is: Is the theory of Evolution of Species in conflict with the history that the Noble Qur’an presents in connection with the creation of Adam (a.s.)? The answer to this shall be discussed in the next question.2

Notes

1. Darwinism, written by Mahmud Behzad, pg. 75, 76

2. Tafsir-e-Namuna, vol. 11, pg. 81

17. Is the theory of evolution of species inconsistent with the viewpoint of the Noble Qur’an with regards to the creation of Prophet Adam (a.s.)?

Interestingly the supporters of the theory of Evolution of Species, as well as those from amongst the Muslims who oppose it, have sought to adhere to the Qur’an to prove their stances. However, probably being influenced by their own beliefs, some have sought to base their arguments on verses which do not have a complete bearing on their views. Accordingly, we shall select, from both the sides, only those verses which can be placed under discussion with regards to the issue under consideration.

The most important verse upon which the supporters of evolution lay great stress is verse 33 of Surat Ale 'Imran:

إِنَّ اللٌّهَ اصْطَفى‏ آدَمَ وَ نُوحاً وَ آلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَ آلَ عِــمْرَانَ عَلـى الْعَالَمِينَ

“Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of 'Imran above the nations.”

They reason that since Nuh (a.s.) and the descendants of Ibrahim (a.s.) and the descendants of 'Imran (a.s.) lived in their ummah and were chosen from amongst them, therefore the case of Adam (a.s.) too ought to be similar. That is, during his period, humans - who have been referred to as the nations - must have necessarily existed and Adam (a.s.) had been chosen by Allah (s.w.t.) from amongst them. And this reveals that Adam (a.s.) was not the first human on the earth but rather, there had been humans before him; the distinction of Adam (a.s.) over the other humans was his superior intellect and spirituality, and this was the factor that resulted in his selection from amongst the individuals, similar to him.

These supporters have also mentioned numerous other verses, some of which have no relation whatsoever with the issue of evolution such that interpreting them to mean this would be interpreting the Qur’an by personal opinion, while other verses are such that they can be considered to be consistent with the theory of evolution as well as with the independent creation of Adam (a.s.). Hence, we have decided against mentioning them here.

As for the objection against this argument, it can be stated that if the term العالـمين (nations) in the verse is in the meaning of 'contemporary people' and اصطفاء (to choose) means that the selection must have necessarily taken place from similar individuals, then this argument could be accepted. However if one were to say that العالـمين includes individuals, who are contemporary and those who are not, just as has been reported in the well-known tradition of the Noble Prophet (S), in connection with the excellence of Hadhrat Fatimah (s.a.), wherein he says:

أَمَّا ابْـنَتِي فَاطِمَةُةَ فَإِنَّهَا سَيِّدَةَُ نِسَآءِ الْعَالَمِينَ مِنَ الأَوَّلِينَ وَ الآخِرِينَ‏

“As for my daughter Fatimah, she is the chief of the ladies of the world, from the first to the last.”

Then, in such a case, their argument on the basis of the above verse would be inappropriate. This is because it would be exactly as if one says: Allah (s.w.t.) had chosen a group of people from amongst the humans (humans of all eras and epochs), one of whom is Adam (a.s.). In such a case, there is no need for humans to have existed during the time of Adam (a.s.) such that the term العالـمين becomes applicable to them or that Adam (a.s.) is chosen from amongst them. This is especially so when the choosing was being done by Allah (s.w.t.), Who had been fully cognizant of the future and of all the generations that were to come.1

However, more importantly, the verses which the proponents of 'constancy of species' have selected as proof from the Qur’an are those that say:

Allah (s.w.t.) has created man from dry clay, which had been taken from dark-coloured and stinking mud. Interestingly, this expression has been utilized in connection with the creation of 'insan'…

وَ لَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الإِِنْسَانَ مِنْ صَلْصَالٍ مِنْ حَمَإٍاءٍ مَسْـنُونٍ‏

“And certainly We created man of clay that gives forth sound, of black mud fashioned in shape.”2

as well as for 'bashar'…

وَ إِذْ قَـالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلاَئِكَةِ إِنِّي خَالِــقٌ بَشَراً مِنْ صَلْصَالٍ مِنْ حَمَإٍاءٍ مَسْـنُونٍ

“And when your Lord said to the angels: Surely I am going to create a mortal of the essence of black mud fashioned in shape.” 3

And later, also for Adam (a.s.) - this being inferred contextually from the mention of the prostration of the angels (Note the verses 29, 30 and 31 of Suratul Hijr.)

At first glance, the apparent meaning of the verse appears to be that initially Adam (a.s.) was created out of black mud and then, when his form was completed, the divine soul was blown into it subsequent to which the angels fell down in prostration before him, except Iblis.

The style of speech indicates that between the creation of Adam (a.s.) from mud and the emergence of the present form no other species existed.

The term 'ثـم ', appearing in some of the verses and used in the 'Arabic language to denote 'a sequence with intervening time intervals', can never be taken as evidence to claim the passage of millions of years and the existence of thousands of species; rather, it could quite possibly allude to the intervals that existed between the various stages of Adam's (a.s.) creation - from mud and then from dry clay and then the blowing of the divine soul.

And it is for this reason that this very term 'ثـم ' has been employed in connection with the creation of man in the embryonic world and the stages of his development within it. The Noble Qur’an says:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنْ كُنْـتُمْ فِي رَيْبٍ مِنَ الْبَعْثِ فَإِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ مِنْ تُرَابٍ ثُمَّ مِنْ نُطْفَةٍ ثُمَّ مِنْ عَلَقَةٍ ثُمَّ مِنْ مُضْغَةٍ مُخَلَّقَةٍ وَ غَيْرِ مُخَلَّقَةٍ لِنُبَيِّنَ لَكُمْ وَ نُقِرُّ فِي الأََرْحَامِ مَا نَشَآءُ إِلـى‏ أَجَلٍ مُسَمًّى ثُمَّ نُخْرِجُكُمْ طِفْلاً ثُمَّ لِتَبْلُغُوا أَشُدَّكُمْ‏

“O' people! if you are in doubt about the raising, then surely We created you from dust, then from a small seed, then from a clot, then from a lump of flesh, complete in make and incomplete, that We may make clear to you; and We cause what We please to stay in the wombs until an appointed time, then We bring you forth as babies, then that you may attain your maturity.” 4

You observe that there is no necessity for 'ثـم ' to indicate upon a lengthy interval; rather, just as it is employed for protracted intervals, it can also be utilized for short intervals too.

From what we have mentioned above, we infer that although the verses of the Qur’an do not directly mention the issue of evolution or 'constancy of species', nevertheless, the apparent meanings of the verses is more in accordance with the concept of independent creation (of course, this is as far as the creation of man is concerned).

Despite not being entirely explicit, the apparent meanings of the verses dealing with the creation of Adam (a.s.) mostly tend to revolve around the concept of independent creation; but with regards to the other living beings, the Noble Qur’an remains silent.5

Notes

1. Another possibility is that within a short time, the children of Adam (a.s.) constituted a small society and Adam (a.s.) was the chosen one from amongst them.

2. Suratul Hijr (15), Verse 26

3. Suratul Hijr (15), Verse 28

4. Suratul Hajj (22), Verse 5

5. Tafsir-e-Namuna, vol. 11, pg. 86

18. What is the Reality of Dreams?

It is necessary that we discuss, in a concise manner, the various opinions that have been propounded in connection with this subject:

There have been numerous interpretations about the reality of the dreams which can be categorized into two categories:

1. Materialistic Interpretation

2. Spiritual Interpretation

The materialists say there could be several causes of dreams:

It is possible that dreams are a direct consequence of the daily acts of man; i.e. whatever has transpired with man over past days becomes embodied for him in his thoughts, whilst he sleeps.

Possibly, a series of unfulfilled desires become a reason for witnessing dreams - a thirsty person observes water in his dreams, and a person awaiting someone, who has gone on a journey, dreams that he has arrived. (From ancient times, it has been said that a camel witnesses cottonseed in its dreams!)

It is likely that fear of something causes man to dream about it; it has been repeatedly observed that those who possess fear of thieves witness them in their dreams.

Freud and the followers of his ideology have presented another material explanation for dreams:

In the course of a detailed introduction they define dreams as being the gratification of repressed tendencies which, with alterations, creep into the arena of self-consciousness, to deceive the “I” within man.

Explanation: After accepting the fact that the human mind is comprised of two parts: The self-conscious part (that, which is associated with the day-to-day thoughts, voluntary knowledge and the freedom of choice of man) and the sub-conscious part (that, which is concealed within the inner-self as an unfulfilled tendency and inclination), they go on to state: It frequently happens that in the state of sleep, when the 'self-conscious' apparatus has shut down, the inclinations and tendencies which we have been unable to gratify due to certain reasons and which have accumulated in our inner-self turn to the sub-conscious in order to achieve a kind of fictitious and imaginary gratification.

At times this is reflected without any change (like an aficionado, who witnesses his beloved, whom he has lost, in his dreams), while at other times there occurs a change in form which is reflected in appropriate appearances, in which case there arises the need for interpretation (of the dreams).

Accordingly, dreams are always associated with the past and never informative of the future. It can only be a useful for reading the unconscious self, and it is for this reason that the dreams of patients are utilized for the treatment of psychological disorders that rely on exposing the unconscious mind.

Some of the experts of the field of nutrition believe that there exists a relationship between 'dreams' and 'the nutritional need of the body', and are of the opinion that if, for example, a person happens to witness blood trickling from his gums in his dreams, it means that the quantity of ascorbic acid in his body has diminished! And if he dreams that his hair have turned white, it can be inferred that he suffers from an inadequacy of vitamin B!!

However, spiritual philosophers offer a different explanation for the occurrence of dreams. They state that dreams are of several kinds:

- Dreams that are related to the bygones, inclinations and desires - and these constitute a major portion of man's dreams.

- Dreams that are distressing and incoherent; these are an outcome of delusion and imagination (although it is possible that they could possess psychological reasons)

- Dreams that are related to the future and provide information in connection with it.

Undoubtedly, dreams that are related to the past and the embodiment of the scenarios that man has seen in the course of his life do not possess any particular interpretation. Similarly, distressing dreams - technically referred to as أََضْغاَثُ أََحْلاَم - which are an outcome of disturbing thoughts and are similar to the thoughts that manifest themselves for man in the state of delirium, too cannot possess any particular interpretation in connection with the future issues of life.

However, psychologists and psychoanalysts utilize them and consider them to be a door for the comprehension of the human unconscious self and a key for the treatment of psychological disorders. As such, interpretation of these dreams is used for the purpose of uncovering the mysteries of the mind and the origins of diseases, and not for revealing future happenings of life.

As for the dreams that are related to the future, they too are of two kinds: One kind consisting of dreams that are plain, clear and explicit, and which do not require any interpretation whatsoever; and amazingly enough, at times, materializing exactly as witnessed either in the near or distant future - without the slightest of differences.

The second kind are those dreams which prophesize future events but, due to the influence of certain mental and spiritual factors, have undergone a change of form and hence need to be interpreted.

There are so many instances for each of these dreams that the existence of all of them cannot be denied. Not only have they been mentioned in religious sources and books of history, but these have also been noticed in our own lives and the lives of those who are known to us, in a measure that prevents us from considering them to be mere coincidence.1

Note

1. Tafsir-e-Namuna, vol. 9, pg. 312

19. What is meant by ‘The Courses’ (Sunnat) of Allah’?

In verse 62 of Suratul Ahzab, the Qur’an mentions that one of the unchanging 'courses of Allah' is 'exterminating the conspirators (against Islam) by means of one general attack - the like of which have been observed in the former nations too'.

Similar expressions have also appeared on other occasions in the Qur’an.

In verse 38 of Suratul Ahzab, the Noble Qur’an, after issuing the permission to break the incorrect pagan custom, which prohibited a person from marrying the divorced wife of his adopted son, says:

سُنَّةَ اللٌّهِ فِي الَّذِينَ خَلَوْا مِنْ قَبْلُ وَ كَانَ أَمْرُ اللٌّهِ قَدَراً مَقْدُوراً

“Such has been the course of Allah (s.w.t.) with respect to those who have gone before; and the command of Allah (s.w.t.) s a decree that is made absolute.”

In verse 43 of Suratul Fatir, after threatening the sinning nations with perdition, the Noble Qur’an says:

فَهَلْ يَنْظُرُونَ إِلاَّ سُنَّةَ الأََوَّلِينَ فَلَنْ تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللٌّهِ تَبْدِيلاً وَ لَنْ تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللٌّهِ تَحْوِيلاً

“Then should they wait for aught except the way of the former people? For you shall not find any alteration in the course of Allah; and you shall not find any change in the course of Allah.”

In Suratul Ghafir, verse 85, after asserting that bringing faith after witnessing the annihilating chastisement descending upon them was not at all helpful for the obstinate disbelievers of the past nations, the Qur’an adds:

سُنَّةَ اللٌّهِ الَّتِي قَدْ خَلَتْ فِي عِبَادِهِ وَ خَسِرَ هُنَالِكَ الْكَافِرُونَ

“But their belief was not going to profit them when they had seen Our punishment; (this is) Allah's law, which has indeed obtained in the matter of His servants, and there the unbelievers are lost.”

In verse 23 of Suratul Fath, after speaking about the victory for the believers, defeat for the disbelievers and non-existence of any protector or helper for them in the battles, it adds:

سُنَّةَ اللٌّهِ الَّتِي قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلُ وَ لَنْ تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللٌّهِ تَبْدِيلاً

“Such has been the course of Allah (s.w.t.) that has indeed run before, and you shall not find a change in Allah's course.”

And again in verse 77 of Suratul Isra', when speaking of the conspiracy to either banish or kill the Noble Prophet (S), it adds:

سُنَّةَ مَنْ قَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا قَبْلَكَ مِنْ رُسُلِنَا وَ لاَ تَجِدُ لِسُنَّتِنَا تَحْوِيلاً

“(This is Our) course with regard to those of Our messengers whom We sent before you, and you shall not find a change in Our course.”

From all these verses, it can be clearly inferred that ( سنة or سنَنت ) courses, in these instances, refer to the fundamental laws related to creation and legislation which are never subject to any alteration. In other words, in the world of divine creation and legislation, Allah (s.w.t.) has ordained certain principles which, similar to the constitutions prevailing amongst the people of the world, cannot become victims of distortion and alteration. These rules had prevailed over the past nations and shall continue to do so over the present and future ones.

Assistance to the prophets, defeat of the disbelievers, the compulsion to act in compliance with the Divine commands howsoever displeasing they may appear to a society, futility of repentance at the time of descent of Divine chastisement and the like are some examples of these eternal courses.1

Note

1. Tafsir-e-Namuna, vol. 17, pg. 434