Notes And Commentary On Chapter 6
Sheikh Al-Mufid has bitterly criticised Allama Sheikh As-Saduq by saying that whatever, the respected author has mentioned in this chapter, is of no use and it is strictly contradictory, and this is the result of following every Hadith without due care.
The truth of the matter on this issue is that God does not desire any other than virtuous acts and has not demanded other than pious acts. He has no intention for iniquity or vice, nor does He like immoral or proscribed acts. He therefore, says in the Qur’an:
يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ بِكُمُ الْيُسْرَ وَلَا يُرِيدُ بِكُمُ الْعُسْرَ
“… Allah desires ease for you, and He does not desire for you difficulty…” (2:185).
وَاللَّهُ يُرِيدُ أَن يَتُوبَ عَلَيْكُمْ وَيُرِيدُ الَّذِينَ يَتَّبِعُونَ الشَّهَوَاتِ أَن تَمِيلُوا مَيْلًا عَظِيمًا
“God desires to accept your apology, but those who follow lust and corporal desires wants you to go away from the right path…” (4:27).
How clearly has God demonstrated that He does not like iniquity and vices? Instead, He prefers guidance and desires leniency and comfort for humans. On the other hand, if He desired evil then it would contradict His stated words, while there is no conflict between His will and desire.
Rebuttal Of Shaykh Al-Mufid’s Criticism
We fail to understand as to where Shaykh Al-Mufid found contradictions in Shaykh Abu Ja’far’s accounts, when all his text had been extracted from the Ahadith of Imam Ja’far As-Sadiq (‘a). These were available in Shaykh Abu Ja’far’s book, Al-Tawhid, on the evidence of Fazl Ibn Yasaar.
This Hadith was a bit complex and intricate. However, the noble author had mentioned no apparent conflict or contradiction in it. This work was basically designed to counter the beliefs of Asha’iriya school of thought, whose doctrine had been mentioned in the previous pages. It claimed God’s will and desire to be the real perpetrator of all the things that happened in the Universe, including evil, the acceptance of faith by a believer, denial by a disbeliever and that He is in full agreement with it.
The summary of Imam’s statement is that it is true that it is God’s will and desire that all of what happens in the Universe must be within His Knowledge, because He knows what was to happen before it happened. But this does not mean that He should like it and be pleased with it. Plainly speaking, some of the resultant claims are such that God neither approves of, nor is He pleased with such things as the Doctrine of trinity adopted by the Christians. God Himself had reprimanded them for this concept, or condemned the disobedience and apostasy of the polytheists. In Surah Az-Zumar, He said:
وَلَا يَرْضَىٰ لِعِبَادِهِ الْكُفْرَ
“God is not pleased with the kufr and shirk of the people” (39:7).
It was said that God knew about an act before it happened, it would thus be essential that the event happened in accordance with His knowledge. Therefore, when God was aware of the martyrdom of Imam Husayn then Imam Husayn would be under a compulsion to die, and thereby his murderer would also be under duress to kill him. This point of view had been effectively rebuffed in chapter four of this book. It had been proven with lucid arguments that ilm or knowledge was never a cause for the predicted outcome to materialize.
Explanatory Notes On Some Qur’anic Verses
Some of the Verses (3, 9 and 11), which were quoted in the text by the honourable author, had apparent meanings that advocate compulsion. Some irrational minds might latch onto these Verses for proving their point of view; therefore, we have provided some clarifications.
In Verse number three, Mashiyyat (Divine will), stands for Mashiyyat al-Qahira i.e. God, while declaring His immense Power. It stated that if He had wanted, then the entire population would have accepted faith. These meanings were justified by the tail end of this Verse,
أَفَأَنتَ تُكْرِهُ النَّاسَ حَتَّىٰ يَكُونُوا مُؤْمِنِينَ
“…Wouldst thou (Muhammad) compel men until they are believers?” (10:99).
This Verse shows that if compulsion was the route to achieve faith, then who was better placed than God to accomplish it? This shows that this Verse was actually negating compulsion rather than favouring it. A person with even mediocre intelligence would appreciate that it did not employ God’s negation for people’s acceptance of faith by choice. If that was the situation, then sending the Prophets and revealing the Divine Books could become a wasteful exercise.
Verses number 9 and 10 have basically conveyed the same meaning. Chapter four of this book also contained some Verses similar to Verse number 11, where its full explanation had been given, and the readers could refer to those pages.
The summary of this discussion would be that the Verses under consideration, point to the true belief that had been explained in chapter five. Whoever was the recipient of God’s favour, for him the acceptance of faith and to stay on course became easier, compared to the one, from whom God has withdrawn His favour. God says: “Those who strive for truth, We show them the way1, and those who stay confined to their Kufr, their hearts are sealed by God2”.
Tazneeb
There was an extensive debate, on the nature of God’s design (Irada), among the scholars. Some proposed that ‘Irada’ belonged to the attributes of Essence of God and the others suggested that it belonged to the Functional Attributes of God, so it was a Probable (Hadith).
Some scholars were adamant that it was Eternal and it belonged to the true Essence of God. Its related aspects were renewable and probable. Some said that it was Hadith, and among the functional attributes of God that kept on changing by the emancipation of renewable impulsive formations.
Another group argued that Irada was an instigator and a reason for action, while some suggest that ilm and irada were two facets of the same thing. According to them, irada was meant to be knowledge with discretion, which became a preference for the creation of things.
Majority of theologians preferred first and the last approach i.e. irada was considered to be an attribute of the Essence of God and its meaning was knowledge with discretion. Whereas, majority of the Ahadith from the Imams supported the second view, which proposed that irada being a functional attribute of God, was a Probable (Hadith).
Sidqa al-Islam Shaykh Muhammad Yaqoob Kulaini had subscribed a full chapter on this issue in Usul al-Kafi. One of the narrations from his work said that Aasim Ibn Hameed had approached Imam Ja’far As-Sadiq (‘a) and asked him whether God was always Mureed (one who desired). Imam replied, “He is not Mureed, but Murad is with Him, therefore, if irada was eternal, then the Universe must be eternal.” Imam further elaborated by saying that God was always powerful and knowledgeable. He desired later on and thus the creation began.
The second narration from Safwan Ibn Yehya said that he approached Imam Musa Al-Kadhim (‘a), and asked him the difference between the desire of a common man and that of the God. Imam first explained the irada of mankind and then said, “It is nothing but that He creates something in a person.”
Then after a short elaboration he spoke again and said that irada of God was nothing other than His action. These Ahadith clearly showed that irada was part of God’s functional attributes.
Many theologians asked that we must embrace the basic belief that God was Mureed i.e. He desired for noble acts. And in being so, He did not aim for any evil acts. The rest should be left to the God Himself, without indulging into any critical debate. If any Qur’anic Verse appeared to be contradictory to this definition, then its further interpretation (Ta’wil) must be sought.
It had been made clear during this discussion that just as God’s Essence remain beyond our intellect and so are His attributes. The acceptance of the basic idea is sufficient for our wellbeing.
