Freewill and Pre-Destination

‘Qada wa Qadar!’ Those were the times of the Umayyad caliphs. Anarchy prevailed. The anarchists were the rulers, their banner being: ‘Our actions are part of God’s decree’. The state-appointed scholars would preach and vindicate claims of predestination in the defence of the caliphate. Following those times, the history of Muslim philosophy began to predominantly overflow with debates over the question of destiny, and the role it plays in the lives of humans.

If one were to generalise the sincere stances transpiring thereafter: the Mutazilite scholars have predominantly been emphasizing the importance of ‘freewill’ and its relevance to our judgement in the Hereafter; the Asharites, on the other hand, propagate that ‘predestination’ alone can define the happenings and workings of this world, a denial of which is tantamount to the denial of God’s attributes.

Hasan Basri’s Point of View

The Mutazilites emerged as a group under Wasil Ibn ‘Ata, a student of Hasan Basri.[1] This man was a beautiful product of his times. While the Murjites were accepting the Umayyad rulers in whatever they stood for, keeping in view their highly tolerant view of ‘postponement’ of verdict till the Day of Judgement, Hasan Basri stood up to declare what, in his opinion, was the most convincing truth. As a Qadarite, he propagated ‘freewill’, and invited all Muslims to act, rather than be led astray and abandon the message of Allah, in favour of some contemporary ruler. He is believed to have said once:

Allah outweighs the Caliph, the Caliph cannot outweigh Allah…Do not confuse the civil power established by Allah with His religion, for no obedience is due to a creature who disobeys Allah.[2]

Basri argued forcefully from the Qur’an. His strong point was that if man was given the Qur’an to follow and to act accordingly, while being given a moral choice, he had to have freewill. If the Qur’an forbade something[3], and if someone were to indulge in it, then it would be the factor of freewill that would justify his punishment in the Afterlife. With predestination, on the other hand, in matters of action, the belief of a Just God would be betrayed. In verse 41:40, Allah tells men and women, ‘Do you what you wish,’ which, according to Hasan Basri, is reason enough to believe in freewill. As for those arguing against him, while citing Qur’anic verses such as, ‘He leads astray whoever He wishes’ (13:27), he maintains that people here referred to, are entirely another group, which does not fall within the general purview of mankind. According to him, the verse actually alludes to worsening the state, by Allah, of those who choose to tread the wrong path out of their own freewill; reference to the context enables this understanding.[4]

Of course, he acknowledges, that in matters not involving human volition, but rather, accidents in the material world, like natural calamities, predestination plays a role, for there quite clearly, Allah ordains it to be, and it is.

Ash‘ari’s Point of View

Ash‘ari, on the other hand, discounted this concept of freewill, while justifying still, the significance of man’s responsibility and his accountability in the Afterlife. As O’Leary puts it, Ash‘ari is of the opinion that:

God creates power in the man and creates also the choice, and He then creates the act corresponding to this power and choice. Thus, the ‘action’ is acquired by the creature.[5]

Ash‘ari, earlier a Mutazilite, eventually generated a new school, independent of the role of philosophy in matters of belief. In 300 A.H., he is known to have publicly abandoned his earlier position, thus:

…I used to hold that the Qur’an was created, that the eyes of men shall not see God, and that we ourselves are the authors of our evil deeds; now I have returned to the truth; I renounce these opinions...[6]

In his view, therefore, making a person responsible for creating and causing his actions and deeds amounts to calling him a co-creator with the Creator, and such dualism, he says, is unacceptable. He opines that it is God who creates both Qudrah (power) and Ikhtiyar (choice), and man comes in with responsibility when he acquires the choice already delineated (Kasb).[7]

The Author’s Inclination

Considering all the foregoing arguments, I do not feel inclined to believe that to proclaim having been given a choice to create action amounts to dualism or to any form of Shirk (polytheism). If that were the case, why would God have created us with the capabilities that we have? And since He did, in fact, create us, what would be our purpose as functional human beings if we were to act like programmed robots? The reality of being able to do something negates the very notion of immaculate predestination. To ‘acquire’ is a possibility, but plausible only so long as such acquiring is subject to a choice presented.

If creation falls within the purview of dualism, why not acquiring? In reality, it is the act of acquiring which gives ‘actual existence to an action’ – something more tangible and palpable. The Qur’an illustrates the mistakes committed by some of the prophets. Were they not the best of believers? Were they not supposed to set examples for both their immediate followers and for all mankind? And yet they erred though definitely out of their sincerity with Truth and Goodness. Had an absolute programming of the Lord been in full action, all the Prophets would have acted in a perfectly stainless manner. Reality, however, is that making it through this life is but a test – for Prophets and ordinary human beings, alike.

The Holy Qur’an has declared this life to be a test (67:2). If we were to take the choice element out of this test, this life would be nothing but a puppet show played by the Lord. One must also keep in mind that all human beings, in the eyes of Allah, are equal – the only ‘hierarchy’ can be with respect to Taqwa (piety). Individuals who feared Allah as He deserves to be feared, were granted prophethood; and not vice versa. God did not make them fear in the previous phases of their lives, although it can be said without any doubt that He knew all that had happened in their lives, all that was happening and all that would happen.

All these arguments point me in the direction of accepting Hasan Basri’s opinion on the matter. Furthermore, what makes an even deeper impact in his case is his presentation. To argue on the basis that the Qur’an is the most acceptable form of argument and his interpretation of verses sound most convincing.


Footnotes
1. Caesar E. Farah, Islam, (New York: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1994), p. 203.

2. David Waines, Introduction to Islam, (Cambridge: University Press, 1996), p. 112.

3. See the Qur’an (6:151).

4. David Waines, Introduction to Islam, (Cambridge: University Press, 1996), p. 113.

5. De Lacy O’Leary, Islamic Thought and Its Place in History, (New Delhi: Goodword Books, 2001), p. 215.

6. Ibn Khallikan, ii. 228

7. Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Causality and Divine Action: The Islamic Perspective at http://www.kalam.org/papers/kamali.htm_ftn26. Accessed September 29, 2003.

Qur'an: Comparative Study - 2:106

"Ma nansakh min ayatin aw nunsiha nati bikhayrin minha aw mithliha…"
Saadia Malik

(The essay below is supposed to be an objective presentation of four scholars’ interpretation of the word, “ayatin” and its implication, thus, on the arguable “law of abrogation”, in verse 2:106 of the Qur’an. An abrupt ending is somewhat inevitable given the author’s resolve not to bring in any subjectivity, and hence, any conclusion must be every reader’s own personal verdict.)

Asad translates verse 2:106 of the Qur’an as follows:

"Any message which, We annul or consign to oblivion We replace with a better or a similar ones. Dost thou not know that God has the power to will anything?"

He understands the term ‘ayatin’ here to mean message, rather than verse, which he says, is wrongly construed by many Muslim theologians. Because ayah literally means ‘verse’, this Qur’anic verse has been used to derive the flimsy “law of abrogation” that argues for the possibility of abrogation of one verse by another verse in the Book. This is totally unacceptable, for the Qur’an is not a product of human effort, whereby the author errs or finds himself at the behest of his short-comings; in the end, making up for those by offering better, more appropriate laws. In addition, there is no reliable tradition going back to the Prophet, suggesting the possibility of abrogated and abrogating verses within the Qur’an. The whole debacle owes itself to the earlier scholars’ inability to reconcile one Qur’anic passage with another. The easy way out was to declare one or some of the verses in question, “abrogated”. The end result has been nothing short of hotch-potch and confusion. Now, the scholars see themselves arguing over which verses were abrogated and which weren’t.

Since the preceding verse talks about the Jews’ and Christians’ insistence on rejecting any Message superceding the Bible, the only befitting interpretation of “ayatin” in this verse is “message”, that is, the Qur’an.

Mawdudi’s translation (rendered into English by Zafar Ansari) reads:

"And for whatever verse We might abrogate or consign to oblivion, We bring a better one or the like of it. Are you not aware that Allah is All-Powerful?"

He understands this verse to have been revealed in answer to the Jews’ and Christians’ constant attempts at pushing the Muslims off their pedestals of faith. The Jews would often try to confuse and ridicule Muslims at their claims of acquiring the word of God: If, as they said, the Bible too was sent down by their Allah, why did the same Creator cause it to be out-dated, replacing it with a new book? Why did he not preserve His word and His laws? Why were there revisions? And indeed, why did He cause his followers, from among believers in the Bible, to forget certain portions of His message? Certainly, they’d tell the Muslims, those questions could not be answered, in hope that the latter would altogether shun their faith in Allah Himself. Those were the cursing times during which this verse was revealed in order to strengthen the faithfuls’ resolve in appreciating their All-Knowing, All-Encompassing Allah. Nothing was beyond Him. If He willed His servants to forget something, it would be forgotten. If He willed for a new law to be established, it would replace the older one – if not for the better, for the same. Surely, Allah is All-Powerful.

Usmani admits himself to the traditionalist stance. He understands ‘ayatin’ to mean ‘verse’. The Jews would comment that various verses in the Qur’an were abrogated by those revealed at a later date. If this is, indeed, the book by Allah, then why were some verses no more applicable? Was He ignorant of those shortcomings earlier? Through this verse, God Himself answers and declares that no revealed verse had any flaws. He reveals what He deems most appropriate at one time, and abrogates it, when circumstances demand, in favour of a stronger commandment.

Islahi understands naskh[1] to mean abrogation of one legal directive for another. The Jews would often remark that if the Qur’an accepted Moses to be the Messenger of God, and the Torah to be His reavealed Word, why would the same God change injunctions given therein? The aim was to cause dejection within the ranks of Muslims, by way of convincing them of their God’s inability to foresee the failure of His own revelation, deeming replacement imperative.

Allah answers. [As Islahi’s pupil, Ghamidi also points out] “The principles of the Torah, which were abrogated because of evolution of society and change of circumstances were replaced by better ones and the ones that were caused to be forgotten were replaced by similar ones. None of these two sorts of replacement can be objected to. The first of them was a natural requisite of the change in circumstances and the other was necessary to compensate for the loss caused by the Jews to the corpus of religion.”[2]


1. As is also used by the Qur’an in Al-Hajj:52
2. Ghamidi, Javed Ahmed. Translated: Shehzad Saleem. 2004. “Surah Baqarah (100-121).” Monthly Renaissance. Journal on-line. Available from http://www.monthly-renaissance.com/SeptQurex2y4.html Accessed November 11, 2004