Brief Account Of The Differences Between Various Islamic Schools On This Issue

Like many other issues, differences persisted among various Muslim schools of thought on the subject of Istataat (potential or capacity to perform). This subject was actually an offshoot of Jabr wa Ikhtiar (compulsion and empowerment). There were some people, who totally rejected any strength and capacity for human beings in committing their actions. Some accepted that men had the potential, while they were in action, but they absolutely refused having any such powers before the commencement of the acts.

It had been reported by Auf Ibn Abdul Azdi in Kitab al Tawhid, on the authority of his uncle that he enquired Imam Ja’far As-Sadiq (‘a) about the subject of potentiality. Imam replied with astonishment, “Have they started a quarrel over this issue as well?” Azdi replied that some of them conjured that the capability (to do or not to do) was with them, while they were in action, but not before the act was committed. Imam heard him and said that such people were mushriks.

Shi’a Point Of View

Shi’a point of view on this issue was that the capability (of committing or avoiding an act) was always available within every man - before as well as, during the activity, as stated in Kitab al-Tawhid on the authority of Hisham. When he had spoken to Imam Ja’far As-Sadiq (‘a) about this, the Imam had said, “God has not asked His people to do or abandon an act, unless He had bestowed that potential (of saying yes or no) with them.”

Therefore, a man would not perform or abandon an act until he possessed that potential, which would be with him before the advent of the task. However, it would be true to say that this strength did not essentially belong to a person as his own act of creation, but was a gift from God.

Imam Ali (‘a) had asked a person, who was discussing the issue of Qadha wa Qadr, “Are you capable (of carrying out an act or abandoning it) through the assistance of God, or are you a partner with Him, and then claim this potential independently.” He replied that his potential was due to God. Imam then said, “If you had given any other answer, I would have punished you.” He elaborated further and said that this potential was provided after fulfilling the contents of the Hadith that had been mentioned earlier. There were several other traditions, which supported this point of view.

Anyhow, the correct approach on this issue is the same as that adopted in case of Qadha wa Qadr. This is more in line with the rational view, which had been appreciated by some of the leading scholars of the opposite school. Allama Fakhruddin Razi wrote, after discussing the issue of Jabr wa Ikhtiar, “The truth, in this debate lies with the statements of the Imams from the progeny of the Prophet, who advocated that there was no total compulsion or freedom in human actions, but a delicate balance between the two states.”

Clearing A Doubt

There were certain traditions in the literature (Usul al-Kafi), which negated human potential. The simple answer to these reports is that all those traditions negated the potentiality in the essence of man, simply because man is a being who is not independent. This idea has been adequately dealt with in the previous chapters.