Part 34

12. If it was that the Legislator [the Prophet, pbuh] addressed the people in the language of the Arabs. In that case he addressed them in their common language. In their tradition, a name can be absolute and general, and a restriction can be inserted to specify its meaning. They say: “He went to the judge or to the governor or to the Amir,” when they are referring to a specific person, while the definite article indicates that this person is someone who is known. These nouns [judge, governor, and Amir] refer to classes or categories, and do not normally indicate a specific person belonging to one of those categories. So it is with words such as Iman, salah, and zakah, which have been used by the Prophet with the definite article. And the Prophet (pbuh) taught them that what is intended by the meaning of Iman is the type of Iman whose attribute is such and such, and by the meaning of supplication whose attribute is such and such in the language of the Arabs as equivalent to assent. He explained: “I am not satisfied with the belief of the heart and the tongue rather than the belief of the heart alone.” But something must act in accordance with that belief, as Allah says: “Only those are believers who have believed in Allah and His Messenger, and have never since doubted . . .” (49:15). He also says: “For believers are those who, when Allah is mentioned, feel a tremor in their hearts ... .” (8:2). There is also the saying of the Prophet (pbuh): “You do not believe until you are such and such.” And Allah says: “You [Oh, Muhammad] will not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, making friendship with those who oppose Allah and His Messenger

THE ASH‘ARITES’ AND OTHER SECTS’ OPINIONS 141

...” (58:22). And He says: “If only they had believed in Allah and in the Prophet and in what has been revealed to him, never would they have taken them for friends . . .” (5:81). There are many other such references in the Quran and the Sunnah. For example, the Prophet (pbuh) said: “The fornicator who fornicates is not a believer as long as he commits it”; and “He whose neighbor is not secure from his harmful conduct is not a believer.” The Prophet made clear to them that tasdiq without which a person cannot be regarded as a believer is to be belief of this sort. Moreover, he elucidated this fact in the Qur’an and the Sunnah without any changing or transmitting of the language.

. Their saying, had the Prophet (pbuh) done that, would have recurred on

successive occasions, can be answered when the Prophet (pbuh) shifted some terms away from their linguistic origins into new meanings and changed their connotations. It is stated repeatedly that the Prophet (pbuh) intended the wellknown meanings of ‘prayer,’ ‘zakah,” ‘fasting,’ and ‘pilgrimage’. What the Prophet intended by the meaning of Iman is based on its meaning in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and a person will not be considered a believer unless he believes in this type of Iman. Allah says: “For the believers . . .” (8:2). This is attested frequently throughout the Qur’an and the Sunnah, It is also attested in numerous independent sources that no one was to be judged a believer who did not perform his religious duties. Similarly, the Prophet said: “He who dies as a believer will enter Paradise and will not suffer torment;” and “The sinner does not deserve this [grace] but rather is subject to grievous punishment.” The Prophet has given the term Iman and its meanings and conditions more attention than any other subject. What sounder attestation could one ask for than this? There also have been those who call for this to be transmitted and made known. Praise be to Allah for this. No one can claim from the Prophet (pbuh) anything that might contradict this statement. It was also reported that the Prophet stated that anyone who has even something of Iman will exit the Hellfire, and he did not say that the believer will enter it nor that the sinners are believers. However, the name Iman is bestowed upon the sinners in certain situations, just as it is with the hypocrites, but under stricter conditions. On the other hand, absolute Iman, upon which Allah

promised the believer to enter Paradise, will not apply to either these or those [sinners or hypocrites].

. There is no justification for departing from the obvious meanings of these

verses which indicate that it is Arabic. It would be said to a person that these verses explain the word “believer” and negate belief for anyone who does not perform good works. This evidence is even more explicit, clear, and numerous that those other verses referred to. Moreover, if such verses indicate that it was Arabic, then what has been mentioned [here] does not preclude that. Hence, when he [the Prophet] spoke to them using the terms “prayer,” “pilgrimage,” and other such [words] they [the Arabs] did not say: This is not Arabic. In fact the Prophet addressed them by the term “hypocrites,” a word which, according to Arab philologists, was not known in pre-Islamic times. However, they did not say: It is not Arabic, since the word munafig, hypocrite, is derived from the verb nafaqa, to act contrary to the dictates of one’s conscience. So if the term was derived from their own language, and some liberties were taken with it, as was the custom among speakers of the language, then this would not have excluded it from being Arabic.

. If it is assumed that such words are not in fact of Arabic origin, then

rendering these general terms more specific is no more significant than the act of shifting the meaning of the term Iman away from what it signified according to the Book, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the pious ancestors. For the texts that exclude from Iman whoever does not love Allah and His Messenger, does not fear Allah, fails to perform his obligations, and embrace what Allah has forbidden, are both numerous and explicit. So assuming that the meaning of certain words may conflict with the connotation of a specific sense of Qur’anic verse, in this case, then making a few general terms more specific is preferable to rejecting numerous unambiguous and sound texts.

There are some who, although they are aware of the general nature of certain terms, do not acknowledge their generality. However, the pious ancestors said: The Messenger of Allah instructed us concerning the meanings of the word Iman. Of necessity, he taught us what he meant by

THE ASH‘ARITES’ AND OTHER SECTS’ OPINIONS 143

it. He also taught us with a certainty, admitting of no doubt that anyone who believes (the Prophet), yet does not express his belief verbally, even though he is capable of doing so, does not pray, fast, or love either Allah or His Messenger, nor does he fear Allah—but rather, displays hatred and enmity toward Allah’s Messenger and fights against him—is nota believer. He also taught us that the unbelievers from among the polytheists, as well as the People of the Book [i.e., Jews and Christians], who knew that he was Allah’s Messenger yet still behaved like the unbelievers described above, were unbelievers rather than believers. Matters such as these are far more certain to us than the claim that the Qur’dn contains no words or expressions that are not of Arabic origin. Hence, if there were ever any conflict [between these two teachings], we would choose to give precedence to those beliefs that are the most certain and necessary.

Someone might say: Should it be known that the Prophet has declared someone to be an unbeliever, then it is likewise certain that there is no tasdiq, assent, in his heart. In response to this we would say: This is mukabarah, hawghtiness. If they mean that such a person is doubtful or skeptical, or that such a person’s belief is not accompanied by assent such that he has practically no belief at all, then this would be correct. If it is established that Iman means solely the assent and knowledge of the heart, then one could justify the just conclusion [namely, that the person is doubtful and skeptical, and in this sense lacks belief]. As for the second conclusion, it may only be established if one acknowledges these prior assumptions, of which this is one. For one’s claim cannot be established on the basis of the other, despite the person’s unbelief. Someone else might say: We know with a certainty that the Jews and others recognized that Muhammad was the Messenger of Allah, and that he judged them to be unbelievers. Hence, we know from the religion of the Prophet that despite the fact that it has been established that someone believes with his heart in Muhammad’s Prophethood, the Prophet must nevertheless declare him an unbeliever if this person does not act on his behalf, loving and honoring the Prophet and submitting to the message that he brought.

According to one of the arguments cited against this view, it has been said: If what you have mentioned is true, then it would serve better as evidence in favor of the views of the Murji’ites, or even those of the Karramite sect, than as evidence for

your own.’ The reason for this is that if Iman is as you have described it, then tasdiq, assent, is simply a kind of speech. For the uses of the word kalam, speech, and gawl, utterance, and the like have to do with both meaning and expression, while the use of expressions to convey some meaning is more frequent in language than the occurrence of some meaning abstracted from the word through which it is expressed. In fact, one will never find the word “speech,” of any kind, used in an absolute, unrestricted sense; this includes words such as khabar, report; tasdiq, assent; takdhib, disbelief: amr, command; and nahy, prohibition—-none of which are ever used without any restriction or qualification in the form of some accompanying expression, gesture, or the like. And if Allah has revealed the Quran in the language of the Arabs, then it must be remembered that this language only recognizes the use of words such as tasdiq, assent, takdhib, disbelief, and others as a kind of unit consisting of both meaning and verbal expression, or a verbal expression that conveys a meaning. Therefore, Allah considers no one to have believed His Messengers simply on the basis of knowledge, or the belief that resides in someone’s heart, until he expresses that belief outwardly with the tongue. Nor will one ever hear a speaker of Arabic say: So and so believed [or disbelieved] so and so, if the first person simply knows in his heart that the other person is truthful or untruthful, but without voicing that knowledge. Likewise one would not say: “he commanded him,” or “he forbade him,” if the command or prohibition merely existed in the person’s mind without being accompanied by some sort of verbal expression, gesture, or the like. The Prophet (pbuh) said: “This prayer of ours is not beneficial in the least according to what people say”; and he said: “Allah introduces whatever new commands He wills, and among His new commands is that you should not speak while you perform your ritual prayers.” Muslim scholars agree that if one speaks during prayer without intending through what he says to benefit his prayer in some way, then the effect of his prayer is nullified. They also agree that the belief residing in one’s heart in regard to worldly matters and desires does not nullify prayer; rather, what nullifies it is for one to speak of these things. Hence, there is agreement among Muslims that such inward belief is not considered true speech.