Extracts From: LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS

Extracts From: LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS75%

Extracts From: LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS Author:
: Sayyed Riyadh al-Hakeem
Publisher: Dar Al-Hilal
Category: Jurisprudence Science

Extracts From: LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS
  • Start
  • Previous
  • 37 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 6251 / Download: 3904
Size Size Size
Extracts From: LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS

Extracts From: LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS

Author:
Publisher: Dar Al-Hilal
English

www.alhassanain.org/english

Extracts From:

LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS

Based on the verdicts of His Eminence Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Muhammad Saeed al-Hakeem (May Allah (swt) prolong his life)

by Sayyed Riyadh al-Hakeem

Dar Al-Helal

www.alhassanain.org/english

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS

Sayyed Riyadh al-Hakeem

Translated by: Bilqis & Zahra Davdani

Office of Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Muhammad Saeed al-Hakeem

IRAQ - al-Najaf al-Ashraf Tel.: (+964 33) 370046 - 333180.

IRAN - Qum - P.O. Box: 37185/486 Tel.: (+98 251) 7740230 - Fax: (+98 251) 7742146.

Syria - Damascus - Sayeda Zaynab (a.s) Tel.: (+963 11) 6470752 - Fax: 6472058.

Lebanon - Beirut Tel.: (+961 1) 451634 - Fax: (+961 1) 451635.

Website: http://www.alhakeem.com

Email: info@alhakeem.com

Notice:

This version is published on behalf of www.alhassanain.org/english

The composing errors are not corrected.

Table of Contents

Introduction 9

Roots of Religion (Usool-u-Din) 12

Branches of Religion (Furoo-u-Din) 14

The Legal Signs of Maturity 15

Deriving the Islamic Laws (Ijtihad) and Following One Who Has Done So (Taqleed) 16

The Impurities (al-Najaasaat) 18

The Purifiers 21

Ablution (al-Wudhu) 24

First Section: Method of Wudhu 24

First: Washing the Face: 24

Second: Washing of the Arms: 24

Third: Wiping of the Front Head: 25

Fourth: Wiping of the top of the feet: 25

Second Section: Conditions of Wudhu’ 25

Third Section: Things Which Nullify Wudhu 26

Tayammum 28

First Section: Reasons for Its Performance 28

Second Section: On What is Used for Doing Tayammum 28

Third Section: Method of Performing Tayammum 28

Prayer (al-Salaat) 30

First and Second Sections: On Its Timing and Number 31

Third Section: On the Clothes of the Performer of Prayer 32

Fourth Section: Place of the One Who Prays 34

Fifth Section: The Qibla (Direction of Prayer) 35

The Method of Prayer 36

First Section: Adhan & Iqama 36

How to Perform Adhan and Iqama 36

Second Section: On the Obligatory Acts of Prayer 38

First: Intention 38

Second: Takbirat-ul-Ehram 38

Third: Standing (Qiyaam) 38

Fourth: Calmness (on obligatory precaution) 39

Fifth & Sixth: Qiraat & Dhikr 39

Seventh: The bowing 40

Eighth: Prostration 40

Ninth: Tasleem 40

Eleventh: sequence 40

Twelfth: Continuity 41

Note: 41

Things Which Invalidate the Prayer 42

Congregational Prayer 43

Conditions of Congregational Prayer 43

Rules of Congregational Prayer 44

Friday Prayer 44

The Prayer of a Traveller 45

Missed Prayers (Salaatul Qada) 45

The Prayer of Signs (Salaatul Ayaat) 45

The Daily Supererogatory (Nawafil) Prayers 46

Fasting 47

Things Which Invalidate the Fast 47

Conditions for Breaking the Fast 48

The Qadha, Fidya, & Kaffara 49

Zakat-ul-Fitr 50

Zakat 51

1. Zakat of Wealth: 51

2. Zakat-ul-Fitr 51

Khums 52

Enjoining the Good (Amr bil Maroof) and Prohibiting the Evil (Nahi anil Munkar) 53

Rules of Islamic Modest Dress (Hijab) 58

Vows & Oaths 59

Lawful Foods 60

Slaughtering 61

Conclusion 62

Back Cover 63

LESSONS IN ISLAMIC LAWS

Dedicated...

To the millions of followers of the Ahlul Bayt (as)...

The pious scholars who have contributed towards guiding the Ummah, protecting it from mistakes and deviations, standing up against different kinds of plots and the cruelty of oppressors and their terrorism.

And the martyrs, whether they are the ones with whom the oppressors of the time have filled the mass graves in the deserts of Iraq..., of the ones whose pure bodies have vanished in the lakes of acid, or those whose bodies were cut up by grinders and other modern instruments of torture...

And the prisoners who faced the oppression of the state and the crimes of the torturers in the terrible cells of the concentration camps, and they did not change in the least.

Introduction

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

All praise belongs to the Lord of the worlds and His blessings and peace be upon Muhammad (saws) and his pure progeny.

Islamic jurisprudence represents one of the important axes of Islamic culture, since it includes as many Qur’anic verses and a large number of the Prophetic traditions include the explanation of various legislative rulings, and the Muslims pay a great deal of attention to compiling the many and valuable legislative writings whether they be with proofs and reasoning or just straightforward rulings.

Despite the above, this book of ours does not reach those levels as it is a simplified book of Islamic Laws (Fiqh), whose aim is to build the Islamic fiqh culture according to the school of the Ahlul Bayt amongst the youth and the teenagers. However, it has a rare distinguishing quality not found in other books, which is that it was written in difficult and exceptional conditions, when we were imprisoned with the rest of our relatives - some of whom were martyred at that time - along with thousands of believing youths who were yarning for the Islamic culture and to learn the Islamic rulings.

Despite the merciless cruelty of the tyrants, the intensity of their watchful eye, and the sudden unexpected dangers surrounding us - because any religious educational activity would bring on execution at the order of the tyrant Saddam - the feeling of responsibility toward the urgent need there motivated me to write these two books, make copies of them, distribute them and teach them secretly in the rooms of the dark locked winds of the prison in which we were kept. The rulings of the book followed the pattern of Islamic rulings specific to the Abu Ghuraib prison west of Baghdad. The fate of one of the books was destruction during a raid and inspection which the torturers used to carry our. This second book, however, had a destiny: I wrote it in a simpler and easier language because the target audience was teenagers and those just entering their youth. Keeping in mind that the harsh security conditions at that time did not allow the believers in Iraq to refer to the last remnant of scholars and students of the Islamic seminary (howza) and to benefit from them, I set upon the writing of this book, copying it secretly and smuggling it outside the prison to full in this gap (the readers will notice that this book is limited to those Islamic rulings which concern the youth). Then the believers seized hold of this book and spread it all over Iraq.

After the fall of the tyrannical regime and the opening up of the opportunity to meet the needs of our children in knowing the Islamic laws on issues which concern them, I suggested the revision of the book for printing, to remind out youths with the help of their previous generation and also to make the latter resolved to know the Islamic laws despite the hard circumstances they had gone through and the dangers that surrounded them. This may contribute to strengthening the feeling of responsibility in this generation, to making them thankful for the blessing of Allah in delivering them from the oppressive regime and to them calling to Allah (swt) to complete his blessing on Iraq and the people of Iraq by delivering them from the yoke of occupation, to give them success in building their noble country and to strengthen their connection with their original religious roots.

This book has been written according to the verdicts of his highness my father, with simplifications, and I have named it ‘Lessons in Islamic Laws’. It is the second in a series of books on Islamic culture made easy, the first being ‘Islamic Belief System in Ten Lessons’. I ask the Creator, the Most High, to make it purely for His sake and that the growing generation may benefit from it. Indeed He is most High, Hearing and Answering.

Riyadh al-Hakim

Note from the ‘abd who typed up the book based on the hard-copy:

For the most part, this PDF is what was found in the book written by Sayyed Riyadh al-Hakeem and translated by the above-mentioned translators. However, there were a few changes in the spelling of some words, the removal of some images and of some sections found in the original book [i.e Questions, Lesson numbers], and the rewording of some sentences, as well as other changes. We ask Allah the Almighty to forgive us for any errors accidently made therein and neither claim perfection in our own selves, or in the copying of the book.

Roots of Religion (Usool-u-Din)

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, and Merciful

“And say: My Lord increase me in knowledge.” [20:114]

There are matters which every person must believe in and they are called the roots of religion.

And they are five:

Divine Unity (Tawhid), Justice (al-Adl), Prophethood (al-Nubuwwa), Leadership (Imamate), Resurrection (Ma’ad).

1- Divine Unity: This means that Allah is One, He is the One who created the universe with everything in it, from the earth to the sky, the sun, the moon, humans, and animals, etc.

2- Justice: This means that Allah is Just and He does not deal with anyone unjustly, and that He made rewards for those who do good and punishments for the disobedient.

3- Prophethood: It means that Allah, in order to guide people to good and distance them and warn them from evil and ugly deeds, has ordered some good people and entrusted them to convey his teachings to mankind. These people he has called prophets and messengers.

There were many prophets, such as Adam (as) who was the first, and also Nuh (as), Ibrahim (as), Musa (as), Isa (as), and the last of the Prophets was our Prophet Muhammad bin Abdullah (saws). Allah (swt) sent him with the religion of Islam and whoever believes in him and his message is a Muslim, so we are Muslims because we believe in Prophet Muhammad (saws) and what he brought - which is the religion of Islam.

4- Leadership: In the sense that the Prophet Muhammad (saws) has appointed a deputy to act as his representative in guiding the people and their affairs, and this deputy is called the Imam (as). The twelve Imams (as) were appointed in the following order:

1. Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (as); buried in Najaf.

2. Imam Hasan ibn Ali al-Zaky (as); buried in Madina.

3. Imam Hussein al-Shahid (as); buried in Karbala.

4. Imam Ali ibn al-Hussein (as); buried in Madina.

5. Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (as); buried in Madina.

6. Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as); buried in Madina.

7. Imam Musa al-Kadhim (as); buried in Baghdad (al-Kadhmiyya).

8. Imam Ali al-Ridha (as); buried in Khorasan (Mashhad).

9. Imam Muhammad al-Jawaad (as); buried in Baghdad (al-Kadhmiyya).

10. Imam Ali al-Hadi (as); buried in Samarra.

11. Imam Hasan al-Askari (as); buried in Samarra.

12. Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi (atf). He is the living Imam of our time who is named Imam-ul-asr (Imam of the age), he is the proof of Allah on us, and he is living in absence and will reappear by the permission of Allah (swt) to establish justice on the earth.

So whoever believes in the leadership of these Imams is called a Twelver Shia. Thus we are followers (Shias) of the Ahlul Bayt (as) because we believer in their leadership and in them.

5- Resurrection: This means that Allah (swt) will bring the people to life after their death and take account of their deeds on the Day of Judgment. He will enter the obedient righteous ones in to Heaven, which contains all that a person could wish for and desire. And he will enter the disobedient evildoers in to the fire wherein they will be punished.

So we must obey Allah (swt) and abide by the rules of religion, such as prayers, fasting, etc. - which we will explain. Thus we should adopt praiseworthy qualities such as truthfulness, trustworthiness, and justice, so that Allah (swt) may be pleased with us and enter us in to the Heaven in which the Prophets, the Imams, the martyrs and all the righteous live.

Branches of Religion (Furoo-u-Din)

These are the Islamic rulings which are compulsory for every Muslim to follow. The most important of them are ten in number:

1- Prayer (al-Salat).

2- Fasting (al-Sawm).

3- Pilgrimage (al-Hajj).

4- Tax (Khums).

5- Tax (Zakat).

6- Holy War (Jihad).

7- Enjoining the good (Amr bil Maaroof).

8- Forbidding the evil (Nahi anil Munkar).

9- Attachment to the Prophet (saws), to the Imams (as) after him, and also to the believers with regard to their faith (Tawalla).

10- To detest the enemies of Allah (swt) from the disbelievers and the oppressors who have deviated from the truth (Tabarra).

The Legal Signs of Maturity

A boy’s maturity has three signs:

1- That he has completed fifteen years according to the Islamic calendar, which equals around fourteen years and six and a half months according to the Christian calendar.

2- Emission of semen due to wet dreams or by any other means.

3- The appearance of thick hair on the face and around the pubic region.

And it is sufficient for maturity that one of these signs is verified from these three signs, even if the other signs are not present.

If the boy doesn’t know whether he is mature or not then he should discuss the subject with a senior member of his family like his father or older brother, who would make things clear for him.

A girl’s maturity has only one sign:

Completion of nine years according to the Islamic calendar, which equals around eight years, eight months and twenty days according to the Christian calendar.

Issue 1: When a boy or a girl reaches the age of legal maturity, the stage of childhood ends and they must comply with the laws of Islam. So they must perform all the obligatory acts and refrain from all the prohibited acts. And their judgment becomes like that of an adult such that Allah (swt) will take them to account for their deeds and show gratitude to them for their obedience and write for them a great deal of reward on the Day of Judgment. In addition, they should perform some recommended acts to increase their reward, like helping the poor, visiting Mosques and the shrines of the Prophet (saws) and the Imams (as), supplicating, reciting the Qur’an, and performing some of the recommended prayers. If they don’t know about these then they should ask others so that they don’t miss out on the opportunity to earn the reward of these acts. Over and above all of this they must rely on Allah (swt) and seek His help in their affairs, for He, the Most High, is the best Master and the best Helper.

Deriving the Islamic Laws (Ijtihad) and Following One Who Has Done So (Taqleed)

We have mentioned before that a Muslim must comply with the branches of religion and all the Islamic Laws which Allah (swt) has ordered, so that Allah (swt) may be pleased him and make him enter Heaven after his death. However, there is a problem confronting us: the Prophet (saws) to whom Allah (swt) communicated he laws of Islam passed away more than fourteen hundred years ago. So how do we know the rules of religion if the Messenger (saws) and the Imams (as) are not present before us?

In order to solve this problem we say: There are scholars who have studied the religious sciences for many years and specialized in them in order to know the rules of Shariah.

These scholars are known as the Mujtahideen. The Mujtahid is the scholar who knows the rules of religion and it is incumbent upon us to ask him and to follow his opinions and to comply with them, and this is what Taqleed means. Thus Taqleed is to act according to the opinion of the Mujtahid.

One may ask why we do not follow a non-Mujtahid in the rules of religion. The answer is that no one except a Mujtahid can have proper and complete comprehension of the rules of religion. Therefore we do not follow anyone other than him, since neither the businessman, nor the doctor, nor the engineer, nor anyone, else has studied the sciences of religion and specialized in them.

The doctor, for example, has studied medicine and specialized in it, therefore we refer to him when we are sick and comply with his instructions and we do not follow the instructions of anybody else in treating our disease. And the engineer has studied the science of engineering and has specialized in it, so he supervises the construction of buildings and bridges.

Thus, in ever field we consult the specialist of that subject. Therefore we must refer back to the Mujtahid concerning the rulings of religion.

Issue 2: The Mujtahid whom people follow must have two important conditions:

Firstly: He should be on a high level of justice, that is he should be obedient to Allah (swt) and must comply with the laws of Shariah.

Secondly: He should be more knowledgeable than all other Mujtahideen (Jurists). Just as a patient would choose the best doctor for his treatment, a person should choose the most knowledgeable Mujtahid to follow in his actions.

And the most knowledgeable is the one who has more knowledge than others in the rules of religion, which are also called the laws of Shariah.

Issue 3: One may ask, how do I know that a particular Mujtahid is more knowledgeable than the others?

The answer to this is that there are scholars who have specialized in the religious sciences, so you must ask one of them who is suitable placed to be able to inform you whether a particular Mujtahid is the most knowledgeable so that you can do his taqleed.

If someone from your family or friends guarantees that they have asked the scholars about the most knowledgeable Mujtahid, then you can rely on them. However, you must be sure that your friend has actually asked one of the expert and trustworthy scholars. And if he has not asked such a scholar, then you cannot rely on his personal certainty, because he is not capable of knowing who the most learned is as he has not specialized in the religious sciences.

The Impurities (al-Najaasaat)

There are impure things which are not permissible for a Muslim to drink or to eat, just as it is necessary for him to remove them from his body and clothes and to purify his body and clothes of them during prayer (salaat). These things are called the impurities and they are ten in number:

First &Second: Human urine and faeces. As for the urine and faeces of animals, they are impure if three conditions are found in the animal:

a) That its blood gushes out when it is slaughtered and does not slowly leak out, i.e it has veins from which the blood can gush forth at the time of slaughtering.

b) Its meat is forbidden to eat.

c) It does not fly in the air.

For example, the wolf contains all these three conditions: its blood gushes out when it is slaughtered, its meat is forbidden to eat in Islam and it does not fly in the air. Therefore its urine and faeces are impure.

If any one of these conditions is not found in an animal, then its urine and faeces are pure (tahir). For example, the blood of a fish leaks and does not gush out, the meat of a sheep is lawful to eat, and the bat and the hawk fly in the air. So all three of these and others similar to them, in which all the three conditions together are not found, have urine and faeces which are pure.

Issue 4: If there is an animal for which you do not know whether the three conditions are met or not, then the ruling is that its urine and faeces are pure.

Third: Human semen, and that of an animal whose blood gushes out when slaughtered and whose meat is not eaten.

Fourth: A human corpse, and that of an animal if its blood gushes out and does not just leak out. So if we find the corpse of an animal like a sheep then it is impure. Similar is the case of an animal which has not been slaughtered according to the laws of the Shariah, such as an animal which has been slaughtered by a non-believer (Kaafir).

As for the dead fish, it is pure because its blood trickles and it does not have veins from which the blood may gush out.

Issue 5: The corpses of every animal whose blood does not flow when slaughtered, such as insects, fishes, and frogs, are pure. As for those animals for whom one does not know whether their blood flows or leaks when slaughtered, they are ruled as being pure.

Issue 6: The meat and skin in a Muslim country is ruled as being permissible to be used for eating and for wearing during prayer. If it is imported from a Kaafir country and if the Muslim who is selling it is a believer who complies with the rules of religion, then you may assume that he is concerned about not sinning against the Shariah.

Issue 7: If it is not known whether the meat and leather present in Muslim countries are local or imported, then they are pure and it is permissible to eat them and to wear them during prayer. Also the artificial leather manufactured in non-Muslim countries are pure.

Fifth: The blood of a human being, and that of an animal whose blood flows when slaughtered, such as sheep and birds. If the blood of an animal leaks or trickles when slaughtered, and does not flow, like fishes, frogs, insects (e.g. fly or bed-bug), then the blood is pure.

Issue 8: If you find blood on your cloths and you do not know whether it is from your own body or from insects, then it is pure.

Issue 9: The blood which is in an egg, inside the thin membrane, is pure. But it is an obligatory precaution (Ihtiyat Wajib) not to eat it.

Issue 10: The blood which flows from the animal on the slaughtering is impure, but the blood which remains in the body of the slaughtered animal after slaughtering is pure. So you can purify the neck of the slaughtered animal after slaughtering it and also the knife. Then when you cut the animal, the blood which drips out is pure.

Issue 11: The blood which comes out of an abscess or boil is impure. However, if yellow liquid comes out of them and one is not sure if it mixed with blood, then it is pure.

Issue 12: If the spirits and alcohol used in perfumes and medicines are intoxicating in their liquid form then they are impure, but if they are intoxicating in their solid form – whether they remain in that state or change to liquid – they are pure. But it is not allowed to drink them because of their intoxicating quality. If the form of the intoxicant is not known then it is considered pure. Even though we recommend avoiding them as it may come to light that the source was in fact liquid intoxicant.

Sixth &Seventh: Dog and pig, and their sweat, saliva and hair. But the sea-dog and sea-pig are pure.

Eighth: Wine and every liquid intoxicant such as whisky and beer, commonly drunk by sinful people.

Ninth: Non-believers (Kafir), with the exception of Zoroastrians, the Jews and the Christians, are considered impure by obligatory precaution. Whereas the Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians are ruled as being pure.

Tenth: The sweat of a ‘Jalala Camel’: that is a camel which has eaten the faeces of a human being.

Issue 13: Everything which comes into contact with any one of these ten impure things, if wet, becomes impure. If it is dry then it does not become impure. If your hand is dry and it touches a piece of dry blood or you shake hands with a non-believer, whose hand is also dry, then your hand does not become impure and remains pure. As the saying goes; dry on dry is pure, without any controversy.

Issue 14: Little Water (al-Maa’ al-Qaleel) and fluids such as juices and oils, become impure in totality if even a minute amount of impure substance falls in them.

If the substance which comes in contact with the impurity is solid, like wood, solid fat or cheese, then only that region of it is impure which comes into contact with the impure thing. So if a drop of blood falls on cheese, then the whole of it doesn’t become impure. Only that part upon which the blood fell becomes impure, so it is possible to purge it off the impurity and then consume it.

Issue 15: Fats or oils, honey, medicines, and other necessities that are imported – except meats and skins (whose ruling was given in issues 5 & 6) – from the countries of the non-believers are taken as pure if one is not sure of their impurity, and the eating, drinking and use of them is allowed.

Issue 16: Drinking and eating of an impure thing is not allowed. The same is the case with anything that has become impure due to contact with an impurity. So, if a drop of blood fell in a container of water or broth, drinking and eating from it is not allowed so long as it remains impure.

Issue 17: It is not permissible to make Mosques impure (najis) and it is obligatory to make them pure at that time. So, if a drop of blood falls in a mosque then it is obligatory to make it pure, and if one is not able to do it then one must inform someone to make it pure.

Note: The ten intrinsically impure things cannot be made pure in any way. Things other than these which become impure can be made pure. For example, if your hand, or the earth, or clothes, or something else, becomes impure, they can be made pure. The thing which make impure things pure and the method of purification are given below.

The Purifiers

These are the things with which it is possible to make things which have become impure pure, and they are ten in number.

First: Water. Things which have become impure, by one of the intrinsically impure things mentioned earlier, can be made pure by pouring water over them. Before we specify how to purify with water, we will give an introduction to the types of water in order to then explain how to purify using each of them. Thus we say that water is of four types:

1. Running water, such as the water of the sea, river, springs and rivulets.

2. Rain water, at the time of its coming down from the sky.

3. Kur water, which is twenty seven cubic spans of hand and equals approximately 464.1 Kg. An example is the water collected in a reservoir or a big hole.

4. Little water, such as that found in a jug or basket, such that it is less than kur.

Issue 18: Rain water, running water and kur water do not become impure if an impurity falls in them as long as the colour, taste and smell of the water does not change to that of the impurity. So, if blood falls into a reservoir of kur water and the water does not change, then it remains pure. However, if a lot of blood falls such that it colours the water red or pink, then the water will become impure and it is not possible to drink it or to use it for wudhu (ablution). Similarly, if an impurity like urine falls into a storage tank of water which subsequently takes on the smell of urine.

Issue 19: Water in pipes and taps have the same ruling as kur water. So if the water from a pipe pours into a bucket or basin in which a drop of impurity falls, it doesn’t become impure.

Issue 20: Little water becomes impure by even a little impurity falling in it, such as a drop of blood, even if it causes no change to the water.

Issue 21: How do we purify things with water?

Answer: Things are purified with water in the following manner: Clothes, blankets and carpets, etc., are made pure with running water, or kur water, or rain water, by one washing. They become pure by just immersing them in water. If rain water covers the carpet or it is immersed in a river then it becomes pure. To make these items pure with little water involves washing them twice and squeezing the water out each time – if they have been made impure because of urine (except if it is the urine of a male baby who is being breastfed). If the material was made impure by something other than urine then washing and squeezing them once is enough. All of the above applies upon removing the impurity from the material.

Utensils for eating and drinking can be purified by washing once with rain water, running water, or kur water. If little water is used, then the water should be poured on them after removing the impurity from them, then filling them with water and pouring it out, then filling them again with water and emptying it, then filling them once more and emptying.

The remainder of everyday objects, like the body, the earth, and other tools such as the knife, the toothbrush etc, can be made pure with running water, rain water, or kur water, by washing once – with the condition that the impurity is removed from them. If little water is used and it has become impure by urine, then it should be washed twice, else it should be washed once. And it is sufficient in the latter case that the water is simply continued to be poured after the impurity is removed.

Issue 22: If the clothes are made impure by something other than urine, such as blood, and if you want to purify it with little water in a bucket, then you must remove the blood first, put the clothes in the empty bucket, and then pour water in to the bucket until the clothing is immersed in it. Then take the clothing out, squeeze the water out, and throw the water to the sink. Now the clothing and bucket have become pure.

If the clothing has become impure by urine then repeat the above procedure once more only.

Issue 23: If a suckling male baby who does not eat food urinates on his or someone else’s clothes, then it is sufficient to make it pure with little water just once, and it is an obligatory precaution to squeeze it also.

Second Purifier: The earth, as it purifies the underside of the feet and shoes if they become impure while walking. If someone reads on an impurity then walks on pure earth which is dry until the intrinsically impure thing comes off, then the underneath of the shoe becomes pure. Similarly, if he is barefoot and steps on an impurity then the soles of his feet become pure by walking on dry, pure earth.

Third: The sun, as it purifies the earth and every immovable thing on it, such as doors, trees etc. If the impure region is wet and the impure part becomes dry (after removal of the impurity) because of the strong heat of the sun, then it becomes pure and does not need water be poured over it.

Issue 24: If the impure earth is dry – whether it has become impure with urine or another intrinsically impure thing – it is sufficient to spray water on it, after which if it dries with the heat of the sun it becomes pure. Thus it is not necessary to purify it with water. If it becomes dry with the wind or the impurity is not removed from it, then it remains impure.

Fourth: Transformation (al-Istehala): This means that the impure thing changes to another substance, for example the steam which rises from the impure water or urine is pure. Also, if a piece of wood which has been made impure is burnt, then its ashes are pure.

Fifth: Change (al-Inqilab): This is the changing of wine in to vinegar. As we have said before, wine is impure, so when vinegar is manufactured the juice first becomes wine – this becoming impure – then it changes gradually to vinegar and so it becomes pure. This is the meaning of wine changing into vinegar.

Sixth: Transfer (al-Intiqal): Such as the transfer of impure blood to insects. For example, the blood of a dog is impure and the blood of an insect in pure. So if a mosquito sucks the blood of a dog and it transfers in to the mosquito, it becomes part of its blood and is thus pure. However, before it enters inside the mosquito, i.e. while being sucks, it is not pure. So, if you kill a mosquito while it is sucking the blood of a dog, that blood is impure.

Seventh: Islam: When a non-believer becomes a Muslim he becomes pure and does not need to purify his body with water. But he remains in ritual impurity and requires obligatory ceremonial bath (ghusl) for ceremonial uncleanliness (janabah) if he was in a state of ceremonial uncleanliness or a woman was in a state of menses (hayz).

Eighth: Relation (al-Tabaiyya): The son of a non-believer is, like his father, not pure – this is upon obligatory precaution – but if the non-believer becomes a Muslim then his minor children become pure as a consequence of his purity. There are also other cases of relation-please refer to the detailed books of fiqh for these.

Ninth: Removal of the intrinsic impurity: This makes pure the thing made impure in two cases only:

1- The body of an animal: if a chicken eats something impure and its beak becomes covered with the impure thing, then it will becomes pure by mere removal of the impure thing from it and it does not need to be made pure with water.

2- The inside of the human body: if blood comes out of the mouth, ear, or nose of a person, then it will become pure by mere removal of the blood and the inside of the mouth, ear, or nose does not need to be purified with water. However, if the lips have become najis then they must be purified as they are on the outside of the body.

Tenth: Absence (al-Ghayba): If your friend or someone from your family is religious and he knows that his vessel has been made impure, and after a while you see him drinking from with vessel, then you can take the Bessel as being pure without needing to ask him about it, because he is a believer and it incumbent on him not to drink something impure.

Note: When one wants to relieve oneself, one must pay attention to choose a covered place like a toilet and not to reveal oneself in front of other people.

Issue 25: The place from which urine comes out must be washed once with running water or kur water such as water from the pipes, or twice with little water such as water from a jug. As for the place from which the faeces comes out, it is sufficient to continue washing once until the impurity is removed, after which the place becomes pure without needing to use water.

Issue 26: The water which is used to purify the places, from which urine and faeces come out after one has relieved oneself, is pure so long as particles of impurity are not seen in it. And this water is called the water for Istinja.

Issue 27: For men it is recommended to empty the male organ from the remaining urine and to purify it by pressure – for example from the bottom of the organ at its root to its top, and after that if any liquid comes out about which is in doubt whether it is urine or other than urine, then it is ruled as being pure. This process if called Istebra.

Part 1: Fate and Destiny are the Words that Cause Alarm

No two words more awful than fate and destiny have ever struck the ears of a human being.

Nothing can be more depressing to the spirit of a man than the feeling that he has no liberty and all his acts are controlled by a superpower.

It may be said that freedom and liberty are the supreme blessings and the most bitter disappointment is supreme blessing and the most bitter disappointment is a feeling of helplessness, a feeling that one has no independent personality, a feeling that he is just like a sheep in the hands of a shepherd and that he has no control even over his food, sleep, life and death.

A feeling of quiet endurance and resignation resulting from helplessness is more consuming and oppressive to human spirit than any king of fire.

That is the position when a man finds himself helpless against another who is more powerful or against an animal which is stronger. It is easy to imagine what his position will be if he finds himself dominated by an invisible and mysterious force which he cannot resist. Obviously his position will be far worse.

A question which has always engaged human attention is whether the affairs of this world are going on in accordance with a pre-arranged and inevitable program. Are all the events in this world governed by an invisible but immensely powerful force called fate and destiny? Is everything that is happening now or will ever happen, predetermined? Is man subject to determinism and has no liberty of choosing? Or is it that there is no such thing as fate and man is absolutely free to determine his own destiny? Or is it that actually there operates a third alternative, according to which all events of the world are governed by destiny, the influence of which extends to everything without exception, but still its irresistible influence does not curtail human liberty in the least. If this is the case, how is it to be explained?

The question of fate and destiny is one of the most equivocal philosophical questions. For certain reasons to be explained later, it has been a subject of dispute among the Muslim thinkers from the first century of the Hijri era. The various views held in this connection have caused many controversies and given rise to a number of sects in the Muslim world with queer results during the past fourteen centuries.

Though it is a so called metaphysical subject, for two reasons it also comes under the category or practical and social questions.

The first reason is that man’s way of thinking about this question affects his practical life and social attitude.

It is obvious that the spirit and attitude of a man looking at himself as a being subject to inexorable determinism, is different from those of one who believes that he has been created free and hence he is master of his destiny.

Generally speaking, most of the philosophical questions do not affect the spirit, attitude and actions of man. The practical attitude and the social spirit of a person are not influenced by such questions as the temporal eternity or transcience of the universe, the finiteness or infinitude of its dimensions, the system of causation, the theory that many cannot emanate from one and the identicalness of the essence and the attributes of the Self-existent Being.

The second reason is that the doctrine of fate and destiny, despite its being a personal belief, comes under the category of the questions of universal application, for the number of people who are in search of its solutions is very large.

It is one of those questions which engage the attention of nearly all those who have some capacity of thinking over general questions. Everybody is naturally interested in knowing whether he is at liberty to determine his course of life or it has already been irrevocably determined by his fate.

The scope of other philosophical questions is limited. They are only a matter of personal and private interest and do not attract such a general attention.

From these two view-points this question may be included in the category of practical, universal and social problems.

In olden days attention was seldom paid to the practical and social effects of this question. It was discussed only from theoretical, philosophical and scholastic points of view. But modern scholars give more heed to its practical and social aspects, and look at it from the angle of its effect on the way of thinking of the nations and their progress and decline.

Some critics of Islam hold that the biggest cause of the decline of the Muslims is their faith in fate and destiny. Now a question arises, if belief in destiny is a cause of the decline of an individual or a society, how is it that the early Muslims were not adversely affected by it. Did they not have a belief in destiny? Was this question introduced in the teachings of Islam later, as asserted by some European historians? Or is it that the nature of their belief in fate and destiny was such that it was not inconsistent with their faith in liberty and responsibility? In other worlds, did they believe that one’s destiny was not absolutely beyond his control and that he could change it. If so, what was the basis of their thinking?

Leaving aside the basis of their belief, let us see what the Qur’an and the Imams say in this respect. Then we will see what way of thinking we should logically adobpt.

Verses of The Qur’an

Some verses of the Holy Qur’an expressly support the rule of destiny. They state that nothing happens in the world without the Will of Allah and that every event is already recorded in the ‘Book’.

A few of the Qur’anic verses to this effect are quoted:

“Every affliction that falls on the earth or yourselves, already exists in a Book before it is brought into being by us. No doubt that is easy for Allah to accomplish”. (Surah al-Hadid, 57:22)

“With Him are the keys of the invisible. None but He knows them. And He knows what is in the land and the sea. Not a leaf falls, but he knows it, not a grain amid the darkness of the earth, nor anything green or withered but is recorded in a clear Book”. (Surah al-An’am, 6:59)

It is often seen that in the sentence, “there is nothing green or withered, but it is recorded in a clear Book”, the word, Book is taken to be referring to the Qur’an, but it may be said with certainly that here the word, ‘Book’ does not refer to it. So far as we know, not a single reliable expounder of the Qur’an has interpreted the verse that way.

“They said: Do we have any say in the matter? Muhammad, tell them: All matters belong to Allah. They try to bide within themselves what they do not reveal to you, saying: Had we had the matter in our hands, we would not have been slain there. Say: Even though you had been in your houses, those appointed to be slain would have been slain by your sworn enemies while you were in your beds”. (Surah Ale Imran, 3:154)

“We hold the store of every thing and we send it down in an appointed measure”. (Surah al-Hijri, 15:21)

“Allah has set a measure for all things”. (Surah al-Talaq, 65:2)

“Surely We created everything by measure”. (Surah al-Qamar, 54:49)

“Then it is for Allah to have in error whom He will and to guide whom He pleases. He is the Mighty, the Wise”. (Surah Ibrahim, 14:4)

“Say: Allah! Owner of Sovereignty! You bestow sovereignty on whomever you will and you withdraw from whomever you will. In your Hand is all that is good. No doubt you have power to do everything”. (Surah Ale Imran, 3:26)

There are other verses which indicate that man is free and he can change his destiny:

“Allah never changes the condition of a nation unless it change what is in its heart”. (Surah al-Ra`d, 13:11)

“Allah coins a similitude: a town whose people that lived secure and well content. Its provisions came in abundance from every quarter, but its people denied the favours of Allah, so He afflicted them with famine and fear because of what they used to do”. (Surah al-Nahl, 16:112)

“Allah did not do injustice to them, but they had wronged themselves”. (Surah al-Ankabut, 29:40)

“Your Lord does no injustice to His slaves”. (Surah Fussilat, 41:46)

“We have shown man the right path. Now it is upto him to be grateful or thankless”. (Surah al-Dahr, 76:3)

“Muhammad say: This is the truth from your Lord. Let him who believe in it, and let him who will reject it”. (Surah al-Kahf, 18:29)

“Corruption has become rife on land and sea because of the misdeeds of the people”. (Surah al-Rum, 30:41)

“Whoever seeks the harvest of the hereafter, We shall give it to him in abundance, and whoever seeks the harvest of the world, We give him a share of it. But in the hereafter he shall have no share”. (Surah al-Shura, 42:20)

“As for him who desires the worldly pleasures, We swiftly provide in this world whatever We will to whomever We please. Then we assign to him Hell in which he shall burn despised and rejected. As for him who desires the hereafter, strives for it as he should, and is a true believer, it is such people whose efforts shall be appreciated by Allah. Each group will receive its share from the bounty of your Lord. And the bounty of your Lord is not limited” (Surah al-Isra’, 17:18-20).

There are many other verses of both the categories. Most of the expounders of the Qur’an and the scholastic theologians consider the verses of the two categories to be contradictory to each other. According to them it is necessary to accept the verses of one category and explain away those of the other. This way of thinking appeared in the second half of the first century. The exponents of human liberty and the doctrine of free will tried to interpret the verses of the first category. They came to be known as the Qadarites.

Another group inclined to the doctrine of predestination, interpreted the verses of the second category, and was called the Jabarite or predestinarian. Gradually two big groups of the scholastic theologians, two schools of theology came to be recognized. They absorbed in their ranks both the Jabarites and the Qadarites which ceased to exist independently. The Ash’arite school advocated predestination and the Mu’tazailite supported doctrine of free will.

Qadarite

We have used the word, Qadarite for the advocates of human liberty and free will. This term has been used in this sense by most of the scholastic theologians. In the religious reports also this word mostly has the same meaning. Anyhow, occasionally this term has been applied to the Jabarites also. On the whole, both the exponents of free will and predestination did not like themselves to be called the Qadarites, and applied this term to their oponents. The reason of this abhorrence was that a hadith was current according to which the Holy Prophet (s) was reported to have said that the ‘Qadarites were the Magians of the Muslim ummah (nation)’. The Jabarites said that the term, ‘Qadarites’ referred to those who denied taqdir (destiny). Their opponents held that the Qadarites were those who believed that everything, including human acts, was predestined. Anyhow, for two reasons this term stuck to those who denied destiny:

Firstly because the Ash’arite school became popular and the number of its opponents went on decreasing and secondly because the Qadarites were compared to the Magians, who were known to be confirming Divine destiny to what they called ‘good’. Evil was ascribed by them to Ahriman (Devil).

Conflicting Views

We have already said that according to the most of the interpreters of the Qur’an as well as the scholastic theologians, the Qur’anic verses in respect of destiny and human free will are conflicting and hence it was necessary that the verses of one of these two categories should be interpreted in a way different from what they apparently convey.

It may be mentioned here that there are two kinds of contradiction. Sometimes a statement expressly contradicts another. For example, someone says: “The Holy Prophet died in the month of Safar”. Another person says. “The Prophet did not die in the month of Safar”. In this case the second statement expressly repudiates the first. But sometimes the position is some what different. The second statement does not contradict the first, but the truth of the second implies its falsity. For example, someone says: “The Prophet died in the month of Rabial-Awwal”. It is self-evident that if the Prophet died in the month of Rabi`al-Awwal, he could not have died in the month of Safar.

Now let us see how the verses of the Qur’an in regard to fate and destiny on the one hand, and human liberty and free will on the other are mutually incompatible. Are they of the first type and expressly contradict each other, or of the second and the import of the verses of one category denies that of the verses of the other category.

There is no doubt that the Qur’anic verses on this subject do not expressly contradict each other. The position is not that the verses of one category say that everything is destined and those of the second declare that there is no such thing as destiny; or that the verses of one category say that man is free and has a choosing power, but those of the second category assert that man is not free and has no choice. No verses of the Qur’an deny that the Knowledge of Allah is all-comprehensive and that everything depends on His Will.

The reason why the two sets of these verses are considered to be conflicting is that the scholastic theologians and some commentators of the Qur’an think that destiny implies that man is not free. According to them destiny and liberty are mutually inconsistent. They argue that the fact that everything is within the Knowledge of Allah means that everything has been predetermined by Him. Should it be admitted that man exercise his own free will, Allah’s Knowledge may on many occasions prove wrong.

In contrast, if it is true that man is master of his destiny and an effective factor in making or marring his fortune that automatically means that nothing is predestined.

Hence, one out of these two sets of verses needs interpretation.

The commentaries of the Holy Qur’an and the scholastic books of the Ash’arites and the Mu’tazilites are full of explanations and interpretations on this point. The Mu’tazilites explain the verses referring to destiny and the Ash’arites interpret those related to free will. To see the specimens of these interpretations a reference may be made to Tafsir al-Kashshaf by Zamakhshari, whose way of thinking is that of the Mu’tazilites.

Now let us see if it is feasible to have a third view which may resolve the apparent conflict between the belief in fate and destiny on the one hand and Allah’s Omnipotence and His Omniscience on the other. If we can find such a proposition there will be no need of interpreting any set of the Qur’anic verses.

As we will see later there already exists a third view, according to which there is no actual conflict between these two sets of the Qur’anic verses. As a matter of fact, conflict has been created by a misunderstanding on the part of some theologians and commentators.

On principle it is meaningless to say that there is any contradiction in the Qur’an and that it is necessary to reconcile the conflicting verses. The fact is that there is not a single verse which may require any reconciliation. That is not the case even with the so called most equivocal verses. The consistency of the Qur’an is a subject which requires detailed discussion, but it is beyond the scope of this book. Anyhow, it may be said safely that constancy is one of the most miraculous aspects of the Holy Book.

Part 2: Evil Effects of the Doctrine of Predestination

There is no doubt that the doctrine of predestination, as enunciated by the Ash’arites, who maintain that man absolutely lacks liberty and freedom is dangerous. It paralyses the spirit and will of man. This doctrine encourages the oppressors and binds the hands of the credulous oppressed. Those who are able to occupy wrongly a position which they do not deserve or acquire wealth by unlawful mean, always talk of the blessing and favour of Allah.

They say that He favours whomsoever he likes. His bounty is endless. That is the plea advanced by them to justify their unlawful gains. The under-privileged do not dare to make any protest, because they think that their protest would amount to raising objection against what Allah has ordained. Hence they endure their lot patiently. This doctrine provides the unjust an easy pretext of absolving himself of the responsibility of his misdeeds. The persecuted believes that whatever befalls him, is directed from Allah and therefore to fight against any act of injustice and tyranny is not only absurd but is also immoral.

A believer in predestination does not care to promote his personality, to reform his moral conduct and to control his actions because he disbelieves in the system of cause and effect and gives no heed to the relationship between man, his deeds and his spiritual and moral personality on the one hand and his happy or miserable future on the other. He leaves everything to his fate.

Political Misuse

History show that during the Umayyad period the rulers made full use of the doctrine of fate and destiny. They were staunch supporters of predestination, and persecuted those who preached self-respect, liberty and free will. That is why this sentence became proverbial: “Predestinarianism and anthropomorphism are the doctrines of the Umayyads and justice and monotheism are the doctrines of the Alawis.”

The earliest supporters and advocates of human liberty and free will during the Umayyad period were Ma’bad al-Juhani, an Iraqi and a Syrian known as Ghaylan of Damascus. These two persons were known for their honesty, integrity and faith. Ma’bad took part in the uprising of Ibn al-Ash’ath and was killed by Hajjaj. Ghaylan was hanged by order of Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik, who received a report about what he preached.

In his history of scholastic theology Shibli Nu`mani says: “Though the stage was now fully set for the eruption of schisms in Islam, they started under political impetus. As during the Umayyad period injustice and tyranny were rampant, naturally the people were agitated and commotion existed everywhere. But whenever anybody made any complaint, the partisans of the government tried to silence him by saying that everything was ordained by Allah and none should utter a word against His will. “We believe that good fortune and ill-fortune both are from Allah”.

Ma’bad Juhani was a very bold and frank man. One day he asked his teacher, Hasan Basri if the question of fate and destiny as raised by the Umayyads, was right. Hasan said: “They are the enemies of Allah. They are liars”.

The Abbasids were the political enemies of the Umayyads. Their policy was different. Some of them, especially Mamun and Mu’tasim supported the Mu’tazilities who believed in human liberty. Still a new leaf was turned from the time of Mutawakkil, and official support was given to the doctrine of predestination. Since then the Ash’arite creed became popular in the Muslim world.

There is no doubt that the popularity and influence of the Ash’arties had a great impact on the Muslim world. Though the other sects, such as the Shi’ah did not officially follow them, yet even they could not escape from being influenced by them. The Shi’ah doctrine differs from that of the Ash’arites, though it is not in cent per cent agreement with that of the Mu’azilites also. Anyhow in the Shi’ah literature in Arabic and Persian there is not so much mention of human liberty as of man’s being subject to his destiny, though the Imams of the Holy Family have expressly declared that the belief in fate is not on the whole inconsistent with the idea of human volition.

The words, fate and destiny have become awful and frightening because with the domination of the Ash’arite school in the Muslim world and it’s influenced over Islamic literature, these words have become synonymous with compulsion, lack of liberty and illogical control of human actions and behavior by an invisible force.

Part 3: Onslaught of Christian Europe on Islam

This aspect of the question provided a pretext to the Christians of Europe to assert that the main cause of the decadence of the Muslims is their belief in fate and destiny and that Islam is a predestinarian system which totally deprives man of his liberty and volition.

While in Europe, Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1839 - 97), took notice of this criticism and replied to it in his articles. In the introduction of an article he said that if the spirit of a people was not pure and congenial, even the pure tenet of its faith were bound to be perverted. In their new form they only would add to its misery and error. They would be converted into a force which would lead it to further wicked deeds.

He further said: The true doctrine of fate and destiny has been greatly misunderstood by the uninformed. The Europeans are mistaken when they say that a nation believing in this doctrine losses its boldness, courage and other good qualities, and that all the undesirable qualities of the present day Muslims are the outcome of this very belief. Today the Muslims are poor. They are politically and militarily weaker than the European nations. Corruption, malice, dissension, disunity, ignorance, lack of insight and satisfaction with a subsistence level of living are rampant among them. They are not concerned with their progress and are not keen to pushing back their enemy. The ruthless armies of the enemy are attacking them from all sides, but they are not perturbed. They submit to every humiliation. They have fallen into slumber and left the treasures of wealth and independence to their enemies and the aliens.

He continued to say: The Europeans ascribe to the Muslims all the evils we have enumerated. According to them all these are the products of a belief in fate and destiny. They say if the Muslims will continue to stick to this belief for some time more, they will be doomed.

He added: The Europeans do not differentiate between a belief in fate and destiny and a belief in predestination according to which man has no liberty of action.

Mental Complex

From the foregoing it should not be concluded that the question of fate and destiny and that of predestination and free will have arisen among the Muslims for any social or political reasons. As we will explain later these questions are primarily a scientific problem, a philosophical unknown, and a mental complex. They arise for every individual and every nation which is capable of thinking over general questions. Probably there is no nation in the world which has not thought over them in one way or other.

Material Philosophy And Destiny

Some people are under the impression that this dilemma presents itself only to those who believe in religion, and the materialists are not faced with any such problem.

This is a false impression. The people having the material way of thinking are also faced with this problem, though with a little difference.

According to the law of causation every event and every phenomenon is the product of one or more causes, and that cause (or causes) in turn is the product of some other cause or causes. It is an indisputable corollary of this law that in the presence of the relevant cause the effect must appear and in the absence of it, the appearance of the effect is impossible.

The materialists accept this relationship between a cause and its effect and consider it to be the basis of their material philosophy. Now obviously the human acts like all other phenomena must be governed by this law. They cannot be an exception to it. If that is so where can theory of free will and human liberty stand?

This is why we see that in all old and new philosophical systems the problem of compulsion and free will exists quite well. As we will explain later, some variation in the nature of the problem makes no substantial difference In fact the belief in fate and destiny has certain advantages that are missing in the belief in physical compulsion.

Oneness Of Allah And His Purity

The dilemma faced by the theologians and the religious philosophers was that they on the one hand believed that nothing could happen without the Will of Allah and on the other knew that nothing dirty or wicked could be ascribed to Him. Consequently they wavered. Some of them held that human acts and deeds, which could often be dirty or wicked, were not subject to the Will of Allah. Others maintained that everything was subject to His Will because He alone is the Primary Cause of the existence of everything.

It is reported that Ghaylan of Damascus who was a supporter of free will once said to the well-known scholar, Rabi’ah al-Ray: “Do you think that Allah likes to be disobeyed?” What he meant was the Rabi’ah believed that even the sins occurred by the Will of Allah. Rabi’ah at once resorted: “It is you who believe that Allah is disobeyed against His will”. He meant that according to the belief of Ghaylan it was possible that something might happen which Allah did not will.

Once while Abu Ishaq Isfarayini was sitting with Sahib Ibn Ubbad, Qazi Abd al-Jabbar, a Mu’tazilite arrived. As soon as Qazi Abd al-Jabbar who denied the generality of fate and destiny, saw Abu Ishaq, he remarked: “Glorified be He who is free from every indecent thing”. He meant that Allah was above - that indecent things be ascribed to Him. He alluded to the belief of Abu Ishaq that everything was from Allah which necessarily meant that indecent things wee also from Him. Abu Ishaq retorted without hesitation and said: “Glorified be He in Whose domain nothing happens except that which He Wills”. He meant that according to the belief of the Qazi, the things which Allah did not will could happen. Such a belief went against the cardinal tenet of monothesism.

As we have pointed out earlier, so long as this question was not affected by political and social motives, it was purely a philosophical problem. A certain section of the people could not acquiesce in the belief that evils and vices were imputable to Allah. They considered Him to be far above such things. Another section which was more familiar with the idea of monotheism, believed that in the universe everything was sustained by Allah and hence the existence of anything capable of taking an independent action against His Will was untenable. This difference of view gave rise to divergent creeds.

Each section tried to prove the correctness of its idea by leveling criticism against that of the other but without being able to answer the objections raised against its own point of view. A reference to the books of scholastic theology will make what we mean clear. The fact is that neither of the doctrines of fate defensible in the form in which they are enunciated by their respective exponents. If both sections could understand that what they say is only partially true, the dispute would have been settled. In fact the belief in fate, destiny and monotheism does not necessarily mean predestinarianism, nor does the doctrine of free will imply the negation of fate.

Part 4: Literal Meanings of `Qadha’ and `Qadar’

In Arabic the words ‘qadha’ and ‘qadar’ are used for fate and destiny. The word, ‘qadha’ means to decide; to settle; to judge. A ‘qadhi’ (judge) is called so because he decides judicially between the litigants. In the Qur’an this word has been used frequently with reference to both man and Allah. It has been used in the sense of giving a final verdict and taking a decisive action.

The word, ‘qadr’ means to measure; to assess; and to determine. It also has been used in the Qur'an frequently.

The events of the world are said to be dividedly decided because they take place within the Knowledge of Allah and are subject to His Will. They are said to the divinely determined because their time, place and nature are determined in accordance with a system fixed by Allah.

We skip over the questions raised and the terminology used in this connection by the scholastic theologians for what they have dwelt on mostly relates to such questions as Allah’s Knowledge and its degrees.

The only question which we may take up in the course of our present study is that the events taking place in the world may be looked at from three angles. Either we may say that they have no past. In other words, an event which takes place at any time is not related to anything preceding it, nor does its existence depend on anything prior to it. Its temporal and spatial characteristics and its scope and extent were not determined in the past.

If this hypothesis is accepted, there is no meaning of destiny. According to this theory the destiny of a thing is not predetermined at the stage of the existence of another thing preceding it, for there is no existential link between the two. If we accept this view, we will have to deny the principle of causation totally and will have to explain unscientifically all events as mere accidents.

However the principle of causation and the existence of an essential link between various events are fact, which are undeniable. Everything acquires its inevitability and its existential characteristics from some other thing or things preceding it. The principle of causation is in a way the basis of all human knowledge.

Another possibility is that we should maintain that every event has a cause, but deny that every cause necessitates a particular effect and that every effect can emanate only from a particular cause. In this case we can believe that the whole universe has not more than one cause and agent and that is Allah. All existing things and all events emanate from Him directly. His Will attaches to every event separately. His Will and Knowledge of everything is independent of His Will and Knowledge of any other thing.

In this case we can say that there is no agent except Allah. He knows from eternity that such and such event will take place at such and such time, and that event must perforce come into existence at that particular moment. No other factor affects the existence of that event. Human deeds and acts also being a kind of event, emanate direct from the Will and Knowledge of Allah. The human will and power are only a facade or a mere illusion, and not actually effective in bringing about any event.

This is true predestinarianism, that is the view which if held by a person or a nation, will certainly lead them to ruination.

This view, besides the practical and social evils which it entails is logically absurd. There is no doubt that it does not stand to reason. The system of causation or the connection of causes and effects is undeniable. Not only physical sciences and perceptual and experimental observations prove the existence of a system of causes and effects, but also there are very strong philosophical arguments in support of it. The Holy Qur’an also endorses the doctrine of causation.

According to the third view, all the events in the world are governed by a system of causation. Every event acquires its inevitability and its existential characteristics from the causes proceeding to it. There exists an unbreakable link between the past, the present and the future, that is between every phenomenon and its preceding causes.

According to this view the destiny of everything in existence is in the hands of some other thing which is its cause, which has necessitated it and has made it inevitable. It is the case which determines the existential characteristics of its effect. Every cause in its turn is the effect of another cause. And so on.

The acceptance of the general principle of causation means the acceptance of the view that every event acquires its inevitability and its characteristics of shape, size and quality from its cause or causes. It makes no difference whether we believe or not in a religion and the First Cause, that is the source of every determination.

If this view is upheld then as far as the question of destiny is concerned, there will be no difference between a theist and an atheist. The belief in destiny is corollary of the belief in the principle of causation. The only difference is that an atheist looks at the question from material angle only. He believes that the destiny of everything in existence is determined by the causes are not conscious of the work they do. On the other hand, a theist maintains that at the long end of the chain there are certain causes which are conscious of their work and their own characteristics. The theists call such causes the ‘Book’, the ‘Tablet’ and the ‘Pen’, whereas the materialistic school has nothing worthy of these names.

Predestination

From the foregoing discussion it is clear that a belief in fate and destiny and that every event, including human deeds and acts, is determined by Divine decrees, does not necessarily mean predestination. It would have certainly meant so, had we believed that man and his will have no role in this respect. As hinted earlier, the Divine Being does not influence the events of the world direct. That is absolutely impossible. He necessitates the existence of a thing through its particular causes only. That everything is decreed by Allah simply means that the system of causation is subject to His Will and Knowledge. As already pointed out, the acceptance of the principle of causation implies that the destiny of everything in existence depended on the causes preceding it. It does not matter whether we believe that the system of causation emanates from the Divine Will or presume that it exists independently, for its independence or dependence does not in any way affect human destiny.

It is foolish to hold that the doctrine of predestination has any relation to the belief in fate and destiny, or to criticize this belief on that account.

There is absolutely no such thing as destiny if it means the denial of an inevitable connection between the causes and their effects. It will amount to the denial of human liberty and volition. In theology very strong and convincing arguments have been advanced to prove the baselessness of such an idea.

But if destiny means a link of inevitability between an event and its causes, then its existence is an undeniable fact. Anyhow, it should be remembered that the belief in destiny is not peculiar to the theists. Every school of thought which believes in the general system of causation has to accept the existence of this link of inevitability. The only difference is that the theists hold that the chain of causes at a dimension other than that of time or place ends at the Essential Being, Who is self-existent. Thus all inevitabilities and determinations stop at a particular point.

Anyhow, this difference neither proves nor disproves the doctrine of predestination.

Part 1: Fate and Destiny are the Words that Cause Alarm

No two words more awful than fate and destiny have ever struck the ears of a human being.

Nothing can be more depressing to the spirit of a man than the feeling that he has no liberty and all his acts are controlled by a superpower.

It may be said that freedom and liberty are the supreme blessings and the most bitter disappointment is supreme blessing and the most bitter disappointment is a feeling of helplessness, a feeling that one has no independent personality, a feeling that he is just like a sheep in the hands of a shepherd and that he has no control even over his food, sleep, life and death.

A feeling of quiet endurance and resignation resulting from helplessness is more consuming and oppressive to human spirit than any king of fire.

That is the position when a man finds himself helpless against another who is more powerful or against an animal which is stronger. It is easy to imagine what his position will be if he finds himself dominated by an invisible and mysterious force which he cannot resist. Obviously his position will be far worse.

A question which has always engaged human attention is whether the affairs of this world are going on in accordance with a pre-arranged and inevitable program. Are all the events in this world governed by an invisible but immensely powerful force called fate and destiny? Is everything that is happening now or will ever happen, predetermined? Is man subject to determinism and has no liberty of choosing? Or is it that there is no such thing as fate and man is absolutely free to determine his own destiny? Or is it that actually there operates a third alternative, according to which all events of the world are governed by destiny, the influence of which extends to everything without exception, but still its irresistible influence does not curtail human liberty in the least. If this is the case, how is it to be explained?

The question of fate and destiny is one of the most equivocal philosophical questions. For certain reasons to be explained later, it has been a subject of dispute among the Muslim thinkers from the first century of the Hijri era. The various views held in this connection have caused many controversies and given rise to a number of sects in the Muslim world with queer results during the past fourteen centuries.

Though it is a so called metaphysical subject, for two reasons it also comes under the category or practical and social questions.

The first reason is that man’s way of thinking about this question affects his practical life and social attitude.

It is obvious that the spirit and attitude of a man looking at himself as a being subject to inexorable determinism, is different from those of one who believes that he has been created free and hence he is master of his destiny.

Generally speaking, most of the philosophical questions do not affect the spirit, attitude and actions of man. The practical attitude and the social spirit of a person are not influenced by such questions as the temporal eternity or transcience of the universe, the finiteness or infinitude of its dimensions, the system of causation, the theory that many cannot emanate from one and the identicalness of the essence and the attributes of the Self-existent Being.

The second reason is that the doctrine of fate and destiny, despite its being a personal belief, comes under the category of the questions of universal application, for the number of people who are in search of its solutions is very large.

It is one of those questions which engage the attention of nearly all those who have some capacity of thinking over general questions. Everybody is naturally interested in knowing whether he is at liberty to determine his course of life or it has already been irrevocably determined by his fate.

The scope of other philosophical questions is limited. They are only a matter of personal and private interest and do not attract such a general attention.

From these two view-points this question may be included in the category of practical, universal and social problems.

In olden days attention was seldom paid to the practical and social effects of this question. It was discussed only from theoretical, philosophical and scholastic points of view. But modern scholars give more heed to its practical and social aspects, and look at it from the angle of its effect on the way of thinking of the nations and their progress and decline.

Some critics of Islam hold that the biggest cause of the decline of the Muslims is their faith in fate and destiny. Now a question arises, if belief in destiny is a cause of the decline of an individual or a society, how is it that the early Muslims were not adversely affected by it. Did they not have a belief in destiny? Was this question introduced in the teachings of Islam later, as asserted by some European historians? Or is it that the nature of their belief in fate and destiny was such that it was not inconsistent with their faith in liberty and responsibility? In other worlds, did they believe that one’s destiny was not absolutely beyond his control and that he could change it. If so, what was the basis of their thinking?

Leaving aside the basis of their belief, let us see what the Qur’an and the Imams say in this respect. Then we will see what way of thinking we should logically adobpt.

Verses of The Qur’an

Some verses of the Holy Qur’an expressly support the rule of destiny. They state that nothing happens in the world without the Will of Allah and that every event is already recorded in the ‘Book’.

A few of the Qur’anic verses to this effect are quoted:

“Every affliction that falls on the earth or yourselves, already exists in a Book before it is brought into being by us. No doubt that is easy for Allah to accomplish”. (Surah al-Hadid, 57:22)

“With Him are the keys of the invisible. None but He knows them. And He knows what is in the land and the sea. Not a leaf falls, but he knows it, not a grain amid the darkness of the earth, nor anything green or withered but is recorded in a clear Book”. (Surah al-An’am, 6:59)

It is often seen that in the sentence, “there is nothing green or withered, but it is recorded in a clear Book”, the word, Book is taken to be referring to the Qur’an, but it may be said with certainly that here the word, ‘Book’ does not refer to it. So far as we know, not a single reliable expounder of the Qur’an has interpreted the verse that way.

“They said: Do we have any say in the matter? Muhammad, tell them: All matters belong to Allah. They try to bide within themselves what they do not reveal to you, saying: Had we had the matter in our hands, we would not have been slain there. Say: Even though you had been in your houses, those appointed to be slain would have been slain by your sworn enemies while you were in your beds”. (Surah Ale Imran, 3:154)

“We hold the store of every thing and we send it down in an appointed measure”. (Surah al-Hijri, 15:21)

“Allah has set a measure for all things”. (Surah al-Talaq, 65:2)

“Surely We created everything by measure”. (Surah al-Qamar, 54:49)

“Then it is for Allah to have in error whom He will and to guide whom He pleases. He is the Mighty, the Wise”. (Surah Ibrahim, 14:4)

“Say: Allah! Owner of Sovereignty! You bestow sovereignty on whomever you will and you withdraw from whomever you will. In your Hand is all that is good. No doubt you have power to do everything”. (Surah Ale Imran, 3:26)

There are other verses which indicate that man is free and he can change his destiny:

“Allah never changes the condition of a nation unless it change what is in its heart”. (Surah al-Ra`d, 13:11)

“Allah coins a similitude: a town whose people that lived secure and well content. Its provisions came in abundance from every quarter, but its people denied the favours of Allah, so He afflicted them with famine and fear because of what they used to do”. (Surah al-Nahl, 16:112)

“Allah did not do injustice to them, but they had wronged themselves”. (Surah al-Ankabut, 29:40)

“Your Lord does no injustice to His slaves”. (Surah Fussilat, 41:46)

“We have shown man the right path. Now it is upto him to be grateful or thankless”. (Surah al-Dahr, 76:3)

“Muhammad say: This is the truth from your Lord. Let him who believe in it, and let him who will reject it”. (Surah al-Kahf, 18:29)

“Corruption has become rife on land and sea because of the misdeeds of the people”. (Surah al-Rum, 30:41)

“Whoever seeks the harvest of the hereafter, We shall give it to him in abundance, and whoever seeks the harvest of the world, We give him a share of it. But in the hereafter he shall have no share”. (Surah al-Shura, 42:20)

“As for him who desires the worldly pleasures, We swiftly provide in this world whatever We will to whomever We please. Then we assign to him Hell in which he shall burn despised and rejected. As for him who desires the hereafter, strives for it as he should, and is a true believer, it is such people whose efforts shall be appreciated by Allah. Each group will receive its share from the bounty of your Lord. And the bounty of your Lord is not limited” (Surah al-Isra’, 17:18-20).

There are many other verses of both the categories. Most of the expounders of the Qur’an and the scholastic theologians consider the verses of the two categories to be contradictory to each other. According to them it is necessary to accept the verses of one category and explain away those of the other. This way of thinking appeared in the second half of the first century. The exponents of human liberty and the doctrine of free will tried to interpret the verses of the first category. They came to be known as the Qadarites.

Another group inclined to the doctrine of predestination, interpreted the verses of the second category, and was called the Jabarite or predestinarian. Gradually two big groups of the scholastic theologians, two schools of theology came to be recognized. They absorbed in their ranks both the Jabarites and the Qadarites which ceased to exist independently. The Ash’arite school advocated predestination and the Mu’tazailite supported doctrine of free will.

Qadarite

We have used the word, Qadarite for the advocates of human liberty and free will. This term has been used in this sense by most of the scholastic theologians. In the religious reports also this word mostly has the same meaning. Anyhow, occasionally this term has been applied to the Jabarites also. On the whole, both the exponents of free will and predestination did not like themselves to be called the Qadarites, and applied this term to their oponents. The reason of this abhorrence was that a hadith was current according to which the Holy Prophet (s) was reported to have said that the ‘Qadarites were the Magians of the Muslim ummah (nation)’. The Jabarites said that the term, ‘Qadarites’ referred to those who denied taqdir (destiny). Their opponents held that the Qadarites were those who believed that everything, including human acts, was predestined. Anyhow, for two reasons this term stuck to those who denied destiny:

Firstly because the Ash’arite school became popular and the number of its opponents went on decreasing and secondly because the Qadarites were compared to the Magians, who were known to be confirming Divine destiny to what they called ‘good’. Evil was ascribed by them to Ahriman (Devil).

Conflicting Views

We have already said that according to the most of the interpreters of the Qur’an as well as the scholastic theologians, the Qur’anic verses in respect of destiny and human free will are conflicting and hence it was necessary that the verses of one of these two categories should be interpreted in a way different from what they apparently convey.

It may be mentioned here that there are two kinds of contradiction. Sometimes a statement expressly contradicts another. For example, someone says: “The Holy Prophet died in the month of Safar”. Another person says. “The Prophet did not die in the month of Safar”. In this case the second statement expressly repudiates the first. But sometimes the position is some what different. The second statement does not contradict the first, but the truth of the second implies its falsity. For example, someone says: “The Prophet died in the month of Rabial-Awwal”. It is self-evident that if the Prophet died in the month of Rabi`al-Awwal, he could not have died in the month of Safar.

Now let us see how the verses of the Qur’an in regard to fate and destiny on the one hand, and human liberty and free will on the other are mutually incompatible. Are they of the first type and expressly contradict each other, or of the second and the import of the verses of one category denies that of the verses of the other category.

There is no doubt that the Qur’anic verses on this subject do not expressly contradict each other. The position is not that the verses of one category say that everything is destined and those of the second declare that there is no such thing as destiny; or that the verses of one category say that man is free and has a choosing power, but those of the second category assert that man is not free and has no choice. No verses of the Qur’an deny that the Knowledge of Allah is all-comprehensive and that everything depends on His Will.

The reason why the two sets of these verses are considered to be conflicting is that the scholastic theologians and some commentators of the Qur’an think that destiny implies that man is not free. According to them destiny and liberty are mutually inconsistent. They argue that the fact that everything is within the Knowledge of Allah means that everything has been predetermined by Him. Should it be admitted that man exercise his own free will, Allah’s Knowledge may on many occasions prove wrong.

In contrast, if it is true that man is master of his destiny and an effective factor in making or marring his fortune that automatically means that nothing is predestined.

Hence, one out of these two sets of verses needs interpretation.

The commentaries of the Holy Qur’an and the scholastic books of the Ash’arites and the Mu’tazilites are full of explanations and interpretations on this point. The Mu’tazilites explain the verses referring to destiny and the Ash’arites interpret those related to free will. To see the specimens of these interpretations a reference may be made to Tafsir al-Kashshaf by Zamakhshari, whose way of thinking is that of the Mu’tazilites.

Now let us see if it is feasible to have a third view which may resolve the apparent conflict between the belief in fate and destiny on the one hand and Allah’s Omnipotence and His Omniscience on the other. If we can find such a proposition there will be no need of interpreting any set of the Qur’anic verses.

As we will see later there already exists a third view, according to which there is no actual conflict between these two sets of the Qur’anic verses. As a matter of fact, conflict has been created by a misunderstanding on the part of some theologians and commentators.

On principle it is meaningless to say that there is any contradiction in the Qur’an and that it is necessary to reconcile the conflicting verses. The fact is that there is not a single verse which may require any reconciliation. That is not the case even with the so called most equivocal verses. The consistency of the Qur’an is a subject which requires detailed discussion, but it is beyond the scope of this book. Anyhow, it may be said safely that constancy is one of the most miraculous aspects of the Holy Book.

Part 2: Evil Effects of the Doctrine of Predestination

There is no doubt that the doctrine of predestination, as enunciated by the Ash’arites, who maintain that man absolutely lacks liberty and freedom is dangerous. It paralyses the spirit and will of man. This doctrine encourages the oppressors and binds the hands of the credulous oppressed. Those who are able to occupy wrongly a position which they do not deserve or acquire wealth by unlawful mean, always talk of the blessing and favour of Allah.

They say that He favours whomsoever he likes. His bounty is endless. That is the plea advanced by them to justify their unlawful gains. The under-privileged do not dare to make any protest, because they think that their protest would amount to raising objection against what Allah has ordained. Hence they endure their lot patiently. This doctrine provides the unjust an easy pretext of absolving himself of the responsibility of his misdeeds. The persecuted believes that whatever befalls him, is directed from Allah and therefore to fight against any act of injustice and tyranny is not only absurd but is also immoral.

A believer in predestination does not care to promote his personality, to reform his moral conduct and to control his actions because he disbelieves in the system of cause and effect and gives no heed to the relationship between man, his deeds and his spiritual and moral personality on the one hand and his happy or miserable future on the other. He leaves everything to his fate.

Political Misuse

History show that during the Umayyad period the rulers made full use of the doctrine of fate and destiny. They were staunch supporters of predestination, and persecuted those who preached self-respect, liberty and free will. That is why this sentence became proverbial: “Predestinarianism and anthropomorphism are the doctrines of the Umayyads and justice and monotheism are the doctrines of the Alawis.”

The earliest supporters and advocates of human liberty and free will during the Umayyad period were Ma’bad al-Juhani, an Iraqi and a Syrian known as Ghaylan of Damascus. These two persons were known for their honesty, integrity and faith. Ma’bad took part in the uprising of Ibn al-Ash’ath and was killed by Hajjaj. Ghaylan was hanged by order of Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik, who received a report about what he preached.

In his history of scholastic theology Shibli Nu`mani says: “Though the stage was now fully set for the eruption of schisms in Islam, they started under political impetus. As during the Umayyad period injustice and tyranny were rampant, naturally the people were agitated and commotion existed everywhere. But whenever anybody made any complaint, the partisans of the government tried to silence him by saying that everything was ordained by Allah and none should utter a word against His will. “We believe that good fortune and ill-fortune both are from Allah”.

Ma’bad Juhani was a very bold and frank man. One day he asked his teacher, Hasan Basri if the question of fate and destiny as raised by the Umayyads, was right. Hasan said: “They are the enemies of Allah. They are liars”.

The Abbasids were the political enemies of the Umayyads. Their policy was different. Some of them, especially Mamun and Mu’tasim supported the Mu’tazilities who believed in human liberty. Still a new leaf was turned from the time of Mutawakkil, and official support was given to the doctrine of predestination. Since then the Ash’arite creed became popular in the Muslim world.

There is no doubt that the popularity and influence of the Ash’arties had a great impact on the Muslim world. Though the other sects, such as the Shi’ah did not officially follow them, yet even they could not escape from being influenced by them. The Shi’ah doctrine differs from that of the Ash’arites, though it is not in cent per cent agreement with that of the Mu’azilites also. Anyhow in the Shi’ah literature in Arabic and Persian there is not so much mention of human liberty as of man’s being subject to his destiny, though the Imams of the Holy Family have expressly declared that the belief in fate is not on the whole inconsistent with the idea of human volition.

The words, fate and destiny have become awful and frightening because with the domination of the Ash’arite school in the Muslim world and it’s influenced over Islamic literature, these words have become synonymous with compulsion, lack of liberty and illogical control of human actions and behavior by an invisible force.

Part 3: Onslaught of Christian Europe on Islam

This aspect of the question provided a pretext to the Christians of Europe to assert that the main cause of the decadence of the Muslims is their belief in fate and destiny and that Islam is a predestinarian system which totally deprives man of his liberty and volition.

While in Europe, Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1839 - 97), took notice of this criticism and replied to it in his articles. In the introduction of an article he said that if the spirit of a people was not pure and congenial, even the pure tenet of its faith were bound to be perverted. In their new form they only would add to its misery and error. They would be converted into a force which would lead it to further wicked deeds.

He further said: The true doctrine of fate and destiny has been greatly misunderstood by the uninformed. The Europeans are mistaken when they say that a nation believing in this doctrine losses its boldness, courage and other good qualities, and that all the undesirable qualities of the present day Muslims are the outcome of this very belief. Today the Muslims are poor. They are politically and militarily weaker than the European nations. Corruption, malice, dissension, disunity, ignorance, lack of insight and satisfaction with a subsistence level of living are rampant among them. They are not concerned with their progress and are not keen to pushing back their enemy. The ruthless armies of the enemy are attacking them from all sides, but they are not perturbed. They submit to every humiliation. They have fallen into slumber and left the treasures of wealth and independence to their enemies and the aliens.

He continued to say: The Europeans ascribe to the Muslims all the evils we have enumerated. According to them all these are the products of a belief in fate and destiny. They say if the Muslims will continue to stick to this belief for some time more, they will be doomed.

He added: The Europeans do not differentiate between a belief in fate and destiny and a belief in predestination according to which man has no liberty of action.

Mental Complex

From the foregoing it should not be concluded that the question of fate and destiny and that of predestination and free will have arisen among the Muslims for any social or political reasons. As we will explain later these questions are primarily a scientific problem, a philosophical unknown, and a mental complex. They arise for every individual and every nation which is capable of thinking over general questions. Probably there is no nation in the world which has not thought over them in one way or other.

Material Philosophy And Destiny

Some people are under the impression that this dilemma presents itself only to those who believe in religion, and the materialists are not faced with any such problem.

This is a false impression. The people having the material way of thinking are also faced with this problem, though with a little difference.

According to the law of causation every event and every phenomenon is the product of one or more causes, and that cause (or causes) in turn is the product of some other cause or causes. It is an indisputable corollary of this law that in the presence of the relevant cause the effect must appear and in the absence of it, the appearance of the effect is impossible.

The materialists accept this relationship between a cause and its effect and consider it to be the basis of their material philosophy. Now obviously the human acts like all other phenomena must be governed by this law. They cannot be an exception to it. If that is so where can theory of free will and human liberty stand?

This is why we see that in all old and new philosophical systems the problem of compulsion and free will exists quite well. As we will explain later, some variation in the nature of the problem makes no substantial difference In fact the belief in fate and destiny has certain advantages that are missing in the belief in physical compulsion.

Oneness Of Allah And His Purity

The dilemma faced by the theologians and the religious philosophers was that they on the one hand believed that nothing could happen without the Will of Allah and on the other knew that nothing dirty or wicked could be ascribed to Him. Consequently they wavered. Some of them held that human acts and deeds, which could often be dirty or wicked, were not subject to the Will of Allah. Others maintained that everything was subject to His Will because He alone is the Primary Cause of the existence of everything.

It is reported that Ghaylan of Damascus who was a supporter of free will once said to the well-known scholar, Rabi’ah al-Ray: “Do you think that Allah likes to be disobeyed?” What he meant was the Rabi’ah believed that even the sins occurred by the Will of Allah. Rabi’ah at once resorted: “It is you who believe that Allah is disobeyed against His will”. He meant that according to the belief of Ghaylan it was possible that something might happen which Allah did not will.

Once while Abu Ishaq Isfarayini was sitting with Sahib Ibn Ubbad, Qazi Abd al-Jabbar, a Mu’tazilite arrived. As soon as Qazi Abd al-Jabbar who denied the generality of fate and destiny, saw Abu Ishaq, he remarked: “Glorified be He who is free from every indecent thing”. He meant that Allah was above - that indecent things be ascribed to Him. He alluded to the belief of Abu Ishaq that everything was from Allah which necessarily meant that indecent things wee also from Him. Abu Ishaq retorted without hesitation and said: “Glorified be He in Whose domain nothing happens except that which He Wills”. He meant that according to the belief of the Qazi, the things which Allah did not will could happen. Such a belief went against the cardinal tenet of monothesism.

As we have pointed out earlier, so long as this question was not affected by political and social motives, it was purely a philosophical problem. A certain section of the people could not acquiesce in the belief that evils and vices were imputable to Allah. They considered Him to be far above such things. Another section which was more familiar with the idea of monotheism, believed that in the universe everything was sustained by Allah and hence the existence of anything capable of taking an independent action against His Will was untenable. This difference of view gave rise to divergent creeds.

Each section tried to prove the correctness of its idea by leveling criticism against that of the other but without being able to answer the objections raised against its own point of view. A reference to the books of scholastic theology will make what we mean clear. The fact is that neither of the doctrines of fate defensible in the form in which they are enunciated by their respective exponents. If both sections could understand that what they say is only partially true, the dispute would have been settled. In fact the belief in fate, destiny and monotheism does not necessarily mean predestinarianism, nor does the doctrine of free will imply the negation of fate.

Part 4: Literal Meanings of `Qadha’ and `Qadar’

In Arabic the words ‘qadha’ and ‘qadar’ are used for fate and destiny. The word, ‘qadha’ means to decide; to settle; to judge. A ‘qadhi’ (judge) is called so because he decides judicially between the litigants. In the Qur’an this word has been used frequently with reference to both man and Allah. It has been used in the sense of giving a final verdict and taking a decisive action.

The word, ‘qadr’ means to measure; to assess; and to determine. It also has been used in the Qur'an frequently.

The events of the world are said to be dividedly decided because they take place within the Knowledge of Allah and are subject to His Will. They are said to the divinely determined because their time, place and nature are determined in accordance with a system fixed by Allah.

We skip over the questions raised and the terminology used in this connection by the scholastic theologians for what they have dwelt on mostly relates to such questions as Allah’s Knowledge and its degrees.

The only question which we may take up in the course of our present study is that the events taking place in the world may be looked at from three angles. Either we may say that they have no past. In other words, an event which takes place at any time is not related to anything preceding it, nor does its existence depend on anything prior to it. Its temporal and spatial characteristics and its scope and extent were not determined in the past.

If this hypothesis is accepted, there is no meaning of destiny. According to this theory the destiny of a thing is not predetermined at the stage of the existence of another thing preceding it, for there is no existential link between the two. If we accept this view, we will have to deny the principle of causation totally and will have to explain unscientifically all events as mere accidents.

However the principle of causation and the existence of an essential link between various events are fact, which are undeniable. Everything acquires its inevitability and its existential characteristics from some other thing or things preceding it. The principle of causation is in a way the basis of all human knowledge.

Another possibility is that we should maintain that every event has a cause, but deny that every cause necessitates a particular effect and that every effect can emanate only from a particular cause. In this case we can believe that the whole universe has not more than one cause and agent and that is Allah. All existing things and all events emanate from Him directly. His Will attaches to every event separately. His Will and Knowledge of everything is independent of His Will and Knowledge of any other thing.

In this case we can say that there is no agent except Allah. He knows from eternity that such and such event will take place at such and such time, and that event must perforce come into existence at that particular moment. No other factor affects the existence of that event. Human deeds and acts also being a kind of event, emanate direct from the Will and Knowledge of Allah. The human will and power are only a facade or a mere illusion, and not actually effective in bringing about any event.

This is true predestinarianism, that is the view which if held by a person or a nation, will certainly lead them to ruination.

This view, besides the practical and social evils which it entails is logically absurd. There is no doubt that it does not stand to reason. The system of causation or the connection of causes and effects is undeniable. Not only physical sciences and perceptual and experimental observations prove the existence of a system of causes and effects, but also there are very strong philosophical arguments in support of it. The Holy Qur’an also endorses the doctrine of causation.

According to the third view, all the events in the world are governed by a system of causation. Every event acquires its inevitability and its existential characteristics from the causes proceeding to it. There exists an unbreakable link between the past, the present and the future, that is between every phenomenon and its preceding causes.

According to this view the destiny of everything in existence is in the hands of some other thing which is its cause, which has necessitated it and has made it inevitable. It is the case which determines the existential characteristics of its effect. Every cause in its turn is the effect of another cause. And so on.

The acceptance of the general principle of causation means the acceptance of the view that every event acquires its inevitability and its characteristics of shape, size and quality from its cause or causes. It makes no difference whether we believe or not in a religion and the First Cause, that is the source of every determination.

If this view is upheld then as far as the question of destiny is concerned, there will be no difference between a theist and an atheist. The belief in destiny is corollary of the belief in the principle of causation. The only difference is that an atheist looks at the question from material angle only. He believes that the destiny of everything in existence is determined by the causes are not conscious of the work they do. On the other hand, a theist maintains that at the long end of the chain there are certain causes which are conscious of their work and their own characteristics. The theists call such causes the ‘Book’, the ‘Tablet’ and the ‘Pen’, whereas the materialistic school has nothing worthy of these names.

Predestination

From the foregoing discussion it is clear that a belief in fate and destiny and that every event, including human deeds and acts, is determined by Divine decrees, does not necessarily mean predestination. It would have certainly meant so, had we believed that man and his will have no role in this respect. As hinted earlier, the Divine Being does not influence the events of the world direct. That is absolutely impossible. He necessitates the existence of a thing through its particular causes only. That everything is decreed by Allah simply means that the system of causation is subject to His Will and Knowledge. As already pointed out, the acceptance of the principle of causation implies that the destiny of everything in existence depended on the causes preceding it. It does not matter whether we believe that the system of causation emanates from the Divine Will or presume that it exists independently, for its independence or dependence does not in any way affect human destiny.

It is foolish to hold that the doctrine of predestination has any relation to the belief in fate and destiny, or to criticize this belief on that account.

There is absolutely no such thing as destiny if it means the denial of an inevitable connection between the causes and their effects. It will amount to the denial of human liberty and volition. In theology very strong and convincing arguments have been advanced to prove the baselessness of such an idea.

But if destiny means a link of inevitability between an event and its causes, then its existence is an undeniable fact. Anyhow, it should be remembered that the belief in destiny is not peculiar to the theists. Every school of thought which believes in the general system of causation has to accept the existence of this link of inevitability. The only difference is that the theists hold that the chain of causes at a dimension other than that of time or place ends at the Essential Being, Who is self-existent. Thus all inevitabilities and determinations stop at a particular point.

Anyhow, this difference neither proves nor disproves the doctrine of predestination.


4