Document Type : Academicm and Research
Authors
1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Quran and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University.tehran.iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Quran and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Department of Quran and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Highlights
One of the debated topics that has drawn the attention of many Islamic scholars is how divine will (mashīyyat) and divine decree (irādah) relate to human voluntary actions. The universality of divine will on one hand, and the attribution of free will and choice to human beings on the other, might suggest the existence of another will alongside divine will, a notion that has tainted the comprehensiveness and generality of divine will. Verse 17 of Surah Al-Anfāl is one such verse addressing this matter. In this verse, God addresses the Muslims who participated in and were victorious at the Battle of Badr: “You did not kill them; rather, it was Allah who killed them; and you did not throw when you threw, rather, it was Allah who threw…”
Based on this and given the apparent meaning of this verse, commentators from different theological schools have each interpreted it as supporting their own denominations: Predestinationist (Jabrī) commentators comnsider the verse as evidence denying human free will; Ashʿarite commentators have applied their theory of acquisition (kasb) to the verse; Muʿtazilite commentators have interpreted it in ways compatible with their principles, and Twelver Shiite commentators have derived human free will while maintaining divine will from this verse, although they differ in their explanations.
The question then is, how can the attribution of killing in the phrase “You did not kill them; rather, it was Allah who killed them” to God be reconciled with human free will? What is the correct analysis of the negation and affirmation of “throwing” in the aforementioned phrase? If the verse does indicate human free will, what is the extent of human agency in their actions? Through a comprehensive examination of exegetic views on this verse and a deeper reflection on the arguments presented by the commentators, we can arrive at a more precise judgment.
A common point among the exegeses of commentators from both schools regarding this noble verse is that all of them believe God’s power has been influential in the “killing and throwing” in the aforementioned verse, and none deny the impact of God’s power. However, concerning the differences in perspectives, it must be said that the first group of commentators adhere to the absolute power of God and assign no role to human beings in the creation of their actions, unlike the second group of commentators who believe that human beings have a role in their actions through acquisition (kasb) to avoid the theory of absolute predestination (jabr). Yet, the arguments presented to prove this cannot establish any real agency for human beings in their actions, and in reality, the theory of acquisition reverts to the same theory of absolute predestination, where humans have no role in their voluntary actions. Thus, it can be said that the first and second groups of commentators share common ground in that human beings have no agency in their actions.
However, the third group of commentators, who believe in the “oneness of divine action” (tawḥīd al-afʿālī), while attributing the “killing and throwing” in the verse to God, also maintain that human beings play a role in these actions and their share is a real not a metaphorical or an acquired one and all of them agree on this point. On the other hand, these same exegetes have presented various explanations for the oneness of divine action, revealing their differences in this regard. Most of this group considers human agency as subordinate to divine agency, meaning the external act is performed by both God and human beings, but in a hierarchical manner, that is, both are causes of the action. Just as God makes plants grow through rain, in the case of human beings as well, God does not perform actions directly but through human mediation. According to the verse in question, the Prophet (P.B.UH.) did not “throw” independently but did so in subordination to divine will. Meanwhile, another group of commentators, considering the numerous verses that directly attribute actions to God, have concluded that if the act of “throwing” in this verse is attributed both to the Prophet and to God, it indicates that the Prophet is a manifestation of divine action and believe that human beings are manifestation for God’s actions.
Various perspectives have been presented regarding the relationship between divine will and human will in the verse: “You did not kill them; rather, it was Allah who killed them; and you did not throw when you threw, rather, it was Allah who threw …” Believers in absolute predestination (jabr) have assigned no role whatsoever to the Muslims and consider the attribution of throwing to them as metaphorical. Another theory proposed concerning this verse is the Ashʿarite theory of acquisition (kasb). Proponents of this theory consider verse 17 of Surah al-Anfāl as evidence for God’s creation of the servants’ actions, arguing that in the phrase “You did not kill them; rather, it was Allah who killed them,” the Muslims had certainly killed the polytheists. However, given the negation of killing from them, they concluded that the occurrence of killing was from God, while the Muslims were merely the acquirers of the act.
The best perspective regarding verse 17 of Surah al-Anfāl that can be accepted is the theory of the oneness of divine action (tawḥīd al-afʿālī). However, some theologians, and even exegetes, have erred in explaining it by considering God as the remote agent (fāʿil baʿīd) and human beings as the proximate agents (fāʿil qarīb), thereby limiting God’s agency. If human beings reach a stage where they detach from all attachments, divine grace (fayḍ) takes their place, and the Sublime God becomes their eyes, ears, and hands and, in reality, human actions become a manifestation of God’s actions, and only then can it be said: “And you did not throw when you threw, but it was Allah who threw…”
Ashari, A. H. (1980). Maqalat al-Islamiyyin wa ikhtilaf al-musallin. Franz Steiner. [In Arabic].
Eskandari, I. M. (1965). Al-Insaf fi ma tadammanahu al-kashshaf. Shirkat Maktabat wa Matbaah Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi. [In Arabic].
Fakhr al-Razi, M. (1986). Al-Arbaʿeen fi usul al-din. Maktabat al-Kulliyyaat al-Azhariyyah. [In Arabic].
Fakhr al-Razi, M. (1990). Al-Muhassal. Dar al-Raazi. [In Arabic].
Fakhr al-Razi, M. (1999). Al-Tafsir al-kabir. Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi. [In Arabic].
Iji, M. S. S. (1907). Sharh al-mawaqif. Al-Sharif al-Radi. [In Arabic].
Jashmi, M. (2018). Al-Tahdhib fi al-tafsir. Dar al-Kutub al-Misri. [In Arabic].
Qadrdan Qaramaleki, M. H., & Qadrdan Qaramaleki, A. (2016). Theory of acquisition and its different approaches. Theological-Doctrinal Research, 5(21), 85-102. [In Persian].
Rabbani Gulpaygani, A. (2002). Al-Jabr wa al-ikhtiyar. Muassasat Imam al-Sadiq (A.S.). [In Arabic].
Ruhani, S. (2005). Al-Jabr wa al-Ikhtiyar. Lisan al-Sidq. [In Arabic].
Keywords
Main Subjects
)
Send comment about this article