Part 90

THE CONCEPT OF IMAN AND RELATED ISSUES 373

The point behind the present discussion has been to raise the issue of Allah’s divine decree. It has been established in Sahih Muslim on the authority of ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Amr that the Prophet (pbuh) said: “With His throne over the waters, Allah foreordained the fates of His creatures fifty thousand years before He created the heavens and the earth.” And we read in Sahih al-Bukhari, on the authority of ‘Imran Ibn Husayn, that the Prophet (pbuh) said: “He [Allah] Is, and nothing existed before Him. His throne is upon the waters, and He records everything in the Reminder [Qur’an]. Then He created the heavens and the earth.” And we have several accounts in the two books of hadith [Sahihan] on the authority of the Prophet (pbuh) according to which Allah knew from the beginning who would enter Paradise and who would enter Hell, and what human beings would do before they had done it.

We also read in Sahihan on the authority of ‘Abd Allah Ibn Mas‘id that after Allah creates someone’s body and before breathing life into it, He sends forth an Angel who records the time when the person is destined to die, the type of livelihood he will enjoy, and the actions he will perform, as well as whether he will be blessed or damned. Other hadiths such as these will be discussed in the proper place, if Allah wills. This notion of predestination has been decried by the Qadarite sect, which arose during the latter days of the Companions of the Prophet. It has been related that the first person to innovate this sect’s teachings in Iraq was a man from Basrah by the name of Sibawayh, [originally] a Zoroastrian. His teachings were then passed on to a man named Ma‘bad al-Juhani. Itis also said that one of the first events [to inspire this teaching] took place in the Hijaz, namely, the burning of the Ka‘bah. After it occurred one man said that it was burned down by Allah’s decree, to which someone else replied that no, Allah decreed no such thing! However, during the days of the rightly guided Caliphs, no one ever dared question the notion of divine predestination. So when those of the Qadarite sect first began denying this notion, they were condemned for it by the surviving Companions of the Prophet, among them ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Umar, ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abbas, and Wathilah Ibn al-Asqa‘. Most supporters of the new teachings were to be found in Basrah and Syria, while a few of them resided in the Hijaz. The pious ancestors had a great deal to say in criticism of the Qadarite sect; according to Waki‘ Ibn al-Jarrah, for example, followers of the Qadarite sect hold that the results of Allah’s commands will only become manifest in the future, and that Allah did not foreordain what people had written or what they had done. The

However, when writings on divine predestination spread and became more well known with the participation of numerous speculative thinkers and others, the majority of those who had embraced the Qadarites’ teachings began to accept the notion of divine foreknowledge, although they still denied the absolute Will and Creation. We have two different accounts, on the authority of ‘Amr Ibn ‘Ubayd, concerning the denial of the existence of a preexisting Book [i-e., Qur’an]. This view was denounced by Malik [Ibn Anas], al-Shafi‘l, Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal], and others, who declared them [the Qadarites] to be unbelievers on account of it. There are many scholars and others who have written in favor of the notion of divine foreknowledge and whose views have been passed down by al-Bukhari and Muslim. However, they do not set forth the views of those who advocated this notion. This was the doctrine taught by hadith scholars who were also Islamic jurists, such as Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] and others, namely, that whoever was advocating a heretical teaching deserves to be punished in order that other people may be protected from any harm which he might bring upon them. [This applies even if inwardly, such a person is convinced of the validity of his interpretation and has based it on the four foundations of the Qur’4n, the hadith, the consensus of the ijma‘, community, and qiyas, analogy.] The lightest punishment he might receive would be ostracism, so that he would no longer enjoy any status within Islam, his testimony would no longer be accepted, nor would he be consulted or allowed to teach or to be appointed as a judge. The teaching of Malik [Ibn Anas] is similar to this; hence, compilers of prophetic traditions did not record the views of individuals who were propagating any sort of heretical doctrine. However, they and other scholars did record the views of many who secretly agreed with the teaching of the Qadarites, the Murji’ites, the Kharijites, the Shi‘ites, and others.

Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] once said that if we failed to relate the teachings of the Qadarites, we would be leaving out the views of most of the inhabitants of Basrah. This was because the question of whether the actions of human beings are

‘5 All the editions consulted indicate that there is a blank here.

THE CONCEPT OF IMAN AND RELATED ISSUES 375

“created,” and concerning the wills of “creatures,” is a problematic one. And just as those Mu‘tazilites who held Qadarite views erred in their thinking, so also did many of those who sought to refute their teachings. For in their attempts to refute their views, they followed in the footsteps of Jahm Ibn Safwan and his followers, denying the wisdom of Allah in His acts of creating and commanding, in His Mercy toward His servants, as well as the causes for Creation and Commands. In fact, they so thoroughly repudiated existing realities evident in Allah’s creatures and laws that they alienated most prudent thinkers who had understood their claims concerning what they believed to be Orthodox Islam. That is, they were making the claim that the views of Orthodox Muslims on predestination were the same as those introduced by Jahm. This subject is discussed more fully elsewhere.

The point being made here is that in the pious ancestors’ efforts to respond to the Murji?ites, the Jahmites, the Qadarites, and others, they would reject views based on reports that had reached them through individuals who did not always represent the thinking of all members of a given sect, or views based on inaccurate representations of their views. Therefore, they would respond to the Murji’ites’ claim that religion and belief are one and the same based on the assumption that this represented the thinking of all members of the Murji’ite sect, whereas at a later time, some Murji’ites arrived at the view that belief is an utterance without tasdiq and without the inward knowledge of the heart; this view was first introduced by Ibn Karram, and was held by him alone. As for his other teachings, they had all been introduced by people before him; hence, this was the only view attributed to him alone by those who, like al-Ash‘ari and others, related what people had said on his authority.

' Abu Thawr, Ibrahim al-Kalbi (?-240 A.H.), was a jurist and a close associate of Imam al-Shafii‘. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, p. 340.)

heart. Hence, when Ibn Karram claimed that belief was nothing but an utterance of the tongue, the Murji’ites took three differing positions on the matter. However, Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] was more knowledgeable than others concerning the views held by various people; therefore, he was familiar with the Jahmite’s views on belief. As for Abu Thawr, he was not familiar with it; in fact, he was well versed only in the teachings of Islamic jurists who held the Murji’ites’ views; for this reason, he related that there was a unanimous rejection of the teachings of both the Jahmites’ and the Karramites’ sects.

THE OPINION OF ABU THAWR ON IMAN

In his refutation of the Murji’ites, Abu Thawr says [in an account narrated by Abu al-Qasim al-Tabari al-Lalaka’i"’ and others, on the authority of Idris Ibn ‘Abd alKarim]'* that a man from Khurasan asked him whether Iman increases and diminishes, and whether it is “words and works” or whether it is “assent and works.” To this Abu Thawr replied: “You asked, may Allah have mercy upon you and may He forgive you and forgive us, about what is Iman? Does it increase or diminish? Is it ‘words and works’ or is it ‘assent and works’? I will tell you about the interpretations of the different sects.”

You should know, may Allah have mercy upon us and you, that Iman is tasdiq in the heart and utterance with the tongue, and works of the body. So there is no disagreement among scholars about a man who said that he testifies that there is no god but Allah, that what the Messengers brought is the truth, and who affirms all of Allah’s laws. But [covertly] he said that he neither believes in nor accepts what he says, that he is not a Muslim. And if he says that Jesus is Allah, denies Islam, and says that he [covertly] does not believe in what he says, he is an unbeliever, not a believer. Mere verbal testimony, without inward assent, is not Iman; likewise, mere assent, without verbal testimony, is not Iman, for Iman is both assent of the heart and verbal testimony. Accordingly, some sects regard Iman as assent of the heart and verbal testimony with the tongue; whereas other

"” Abual-Qasim al-Tabari al-Lalaka’i (?-418 A.H.) was a jurist and a scholar of hadith. His famous book is entitled Madhib ahl al-Sunnah. {Al-Zirikli, vol. 9, p. 57.]

'8 Idris Ibn ‘Abd al-Karim, Abu al-Hassan (7-292 A.H.), was a famous reciter of the Qur’an and narrated hadith from Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, p. 340.]