Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

82 Questions

Author(s): Ayatullah Sayyid Abdul Husayn Dastghaib Shirazi

Translator(s): Sayyid Athar Husayn S.H. Rizvi

Publisher(s): Ansariyan Publications – Qum

www.alhassanain.org/english

Table of Contents

Preface (By the Author's son) 5

God is the protector of Islam 5

Shameless Pahalavi Regime and encouragement to irreligiosity 6

Khaalisee was an enlightened and learned man 6

Distinction of this edition 6

Discussion of Monotheism (Tawhid) 8

Question 1 8

Question 2: Refutation of Daur (dependence) and Tasalsul (postponement) 9

Question 3: Impossible to see the Almighty Allah 10

Question 3 10

Notes 11

Divine Justice (Adl) 13

Question 4 13

Question 5 16

Question 6 17

Question 7 18

Question 8 19

Question 9 21

Question 10: Where is the avenger of the martyrs of Kerbala? 24

Question 11 24

Question 12 26

Question 13 27

Question 14 28

Question 15 29

Question 16 30

Notes 31

Prophethood 32

Question 17: "I witness that you were lights in the sublime loins…." 32

Question 18 33

Question 19 37

Question 20 38

Question 21 39

Question 22 40

Question 23 40

Question 24 41

Question 25 42

Notes 43

Imamate 44

Question 26 44

Question 27 46

Question 28 47

Question 29 48

Question 30 "Peace be in you O blood of Allah!" 49

Question 31 51

Question 32 52

Notes 54

Resurrection (Maad) 55

Question 33 55

Question 34 56

Question 35 56

Question 36 57

Question 37 58

Question 38 61

Question 39 61

Question 40 62

Question 41 62

Question 42 64

Question 43 64

Questoin 44 65

Notes 65

Exegesis (Tafsir) of verses of the Holy Quran 66

Questoin 45 66

Question 46 66

Question 47 67

Question 48 67

Question 49 69

Question 50 70

Question 51 71

Notes 73

Jurisprudence (Fiqh) 74

Question 52 74

Question 53 74

Question 54 75

Question 55 75

Question 56 76

Question 57 76

Question 58 77

Wisdom behind slave-freeing in Islam 77

Question 59 78

Question 60 79

Question 61 80

Question 62 82

Question 63 82

Question 64 83

Question 65 83

Notes 83

Miscellaneous Questions 84

Question 66 84

Question 67 84

Question 68 85

Question 69 86

Question 70 87

Question 71 89

Effectiveness of good omen (Tajaul) and bad omen (Tatayyur) 89

Question 72 90

Question 73 90

Question 74 94

Question 75 94

Question 76 94

Types of Religious Penance 94

Question 77 96

Question 78 97

Question 79 98

Question 80 99

Question 81 100

Question 82 101

Notes 101

Addenda to Fourth Edition 102

Wilayat Faqih and its sources 102

Acceptance of Wilayat is a condition of Faith 102

Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) and death of Ignorance 103

There is only one Imam at any given time 104

The Prophet introduced 'those vested with authority' (Ulil Amr) 105

Obedience of the Imam during occultation 105

General salvation of the poor is in agenda of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) 106

Deep consideration in laws and certainty in beliefs 106

Justice and opposing the selfish desires 107

Qualities of a leader according to Imam Ali (a.s.) 107

Scholars should also obey the leader 108

All misfortune is because of ignoring Wilayat 109

Freedom and stability under rule of Jurist 109

Reappearance of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) 109

Modification of laws proves invalidity of claim 110

Spread of Justice is gradual and voluntary 110

Perfection of intellects after the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) 111

Conclusion 112

The Midnight Sun endangered Islam 113

Equal duration of days and nights in Polar Regions 114

Determination of Noon and Midnight in Polar Regions 115

Limit of Moderation is the Criterion 116

Final conclusion with a little explanation 117

Notes 117

Slavery in Islam 119

Notes 139

Preface (By the Author's son)

One of the most essential Muslim beliefs is that Islam is a permanent and an everlasting religion as mentioned clearly in a number of verses of the Holy Quran. It is mentioned that:

وَمَنْ يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الْإِسْلَامِ دِينًا فَلَنْ يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ وَهُوَ فِي الْآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ

"And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers." (Aale ‘Imran, 3:85)

And so also:

مَا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِنْ رِجَالِكُمْ وَلَٰكِنْ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ

"Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Apostle of Allah and the Last of the prophets ...” (Al Ahzab, 33:40)

The Arabic word of 'Lan ' ‘ﻟﻦ ’ (never) in the first verse implies that other than Islam, nothing ever would be accepted and in the second verse since Prophet Muhammad is mentioned to be the last (seal) prophet, it shows that no other religion is to come after Islam and that Islam is a religion forever.

If Islam is a lasting religion, it implies that it must be perfect. Regarding this, the Quran says:

الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ۚ فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ فِي مَخْمَصَةٍ غَيْرَ مُتَجَانِفٍ لِإِثْمٍ ۙ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

"This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion…” (Al Maidah, 5:3)

According to this holy verse, Islam is complete and is without any defect, not only with regard to the day this verse was revealed, as popularly known, during the Farewell Hajj during the last days of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.), on the contrary it is complete and defectless for all times; therefore it deserves to endure forever and that its lawful and prohibited would remain in force till Judgment Day, that which is declared as lawful by Muhammad would remain lawful till Judgment Day and that it does not require any other prophet or religion to make it perfect.

The perfection of Islam pertains to all its aspects: like beliefs, ethics, political, social, worship and economic laws. All its rules and regulations are perfect. This miraculous aspect of Islam is concealed in the Holy Quran and manifested through the words and actions of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) who themselves are defectless and pure.

God is the protector of Islam

Almighty Allah has protected this noble religion of Islam in every age; as He says:

إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ

"Surely We revealed the reminder and We will most surely be its Guardian.” (Al Hijr, 15:9)

Thus after the passing of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.), Allah protected it through the Twelve Holy Imams (a.s.) whenever unbelievers and atheists tried to harm it and created trouble by means of intrigues, plots and doubts to weaken the belief of people. The Almighty Allah rebutted them through the words and writings of Imams; and mischief-makers were always defeated. This can be known clearly from books like Ihtijaaj of Shaykh Tabarsi etc.

During the occultation of His Eminence, the Master of the Age (a.t.f.s.) the divine religion is supported through practicing scholars and supporters of faith. Whenever an atheist tries to create misguidance, providence brings out one or more scholars of Islam and helps Islam through them.

Shameless Pahalavi Regime and encouragement to irreligiosity

Simultaneous with establishment of the disgraceful Pahalavi regime in Iran, rule of Kamal Pasha in Turkey and Saud family in Hijaz etc. through colonialism, a devastating flood of irreligiosity in the name of communism and materialism or at least, disbelief overtook the entire area, polluting the pure and noble natures of inexperienced teenagers by insinuating delusive doubts by some selfish persons who were apparently highly learned.

These antique doubts, which were already replied to years ago in books, were again put to the uninformed youth and they, instead of referri ng to reliable religious scholars, turned to some false groups having religious titles, such as Bahai, Wahabi and Kisravi etc. invented and nourished by colonialist powers.

Khaalisee was an enlightened and learned man

In these sensitive circumstances, the late Muhammad Khaalisee, who died nearly fifteen years ago in Tehran, was an intelligent and a studious man; he had benefited to great extent from the company of scholars, some of whom were in the forefront in their struggle against other sects. As can be seen from question 30 (in this book) in which he has hinted about his debates against Christians.

A few years before his death, he sent his booklet to us for correction and printing. It was about some objections raised by false and misguided groups. But I, on the basis of the saying that "falsehood is wiped out by discarding it", did not approve its printing. This upright gentleman, under the impact of his own studies and also due to his association with some other people, approached the divine scholar, His Eminence Ayatullah Haaj Sayyid Abdul Husain Dastghaib (r.a.) in whom he had much faith and behind whom he had prayed, and requested for written replies to the said questions. He was very much impressed by the replies of the great scholar. The grand scholar was also pleased and he granted him permission to print that book. Subsequent editions of it also thereafter were sold out soon.

Ayatullah Dastghaib was highly concerned about revising some replies and also a number of activities delayed the publication of this book. But now, by the grace of Allah, it is being presented to the readers in a much attractive style and in enough number of copies. It is in many ways, better than the earlier editions.

Distinction of this edition

Formerly this book was divided into seven parts containing questions about Monotheism, Divine Justice, Prophethood, Imamate, Resurrection, Islamic law and Miscellany. There were in all 82 questions, which became the title of this book. In this edition:

1. A supplement is added comprising of two important questions on current topics: Governance of the Jurist and the preamble to reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.).

2. More explanation is added to almost all replies.

3. Regarding question 57 about prayers in Polar Regions, benefit is obtained from the writings of the respected Agha Nasir Makarim and while replying to question 58 about slavery in Islam, we have benefited from the writings of Sayyid Qutub. These two articles are given at the end and they are satisfactory replies to today's most debated topics.

Sayyid Muhammad Hashim Dastghaib

Discussion of Monotheism (Tawhid)

"He is inside the things through His power, but He is not like something which is inside something. He is outside the things but He is not like something which comes out of something. "

Question 1

Q. 1: Please explain the above tradition. What do those who believe in unity of existence (Wahdatul Wujud) say and how to contradict them?

A: The object of this question is a sentence from the tradition of Amirul Momineen 's (a.s.) mentioned in Usu/ Kafi. It explains that the Almighty Allah is free from all physical qualities. The complete tradition is as follows:

Amirul Momineen (a.s.) was asked, "How did you recognize your Lord?"

He replied:

"Through that with which He has introduced His self."

"How has He introduced Himself?" asked the inquirer.

Imam (a.s.) replied: "He is not alike any form and neither is he perceived by the senses. Nor can He be compared to anything. In spite of being far, He is near and despite being near, He is far. He is above everything and nothing is above Him. He is ahead of everything and nothing is ahead of Him. He is inside the things through His power, but He is not like something, which is inside something. He is outside the things but He is not like something, which comes out of something. Purified is one Who is such and other than Him is not like this and He is the beginning of everything."1

'He is inside the things' means that nothing and no part of a thing is empty of Him in the sense of His control over them· and His knowledge and His grace on them. '

But He is not like something, which is inside something' means that His being in them is not like entering of something or someone into a place, for example sitting on a throne, nor it is like the entrance of warmth or heat in water, because each of these is among the qualities of a body.

'He is outside the things ' means that He is beyond being near or close to anything. He is beyond anything that can be imagined and His attributes are dissimilar to all qualities of anything or anyone.

'He is not like something, which comes out of something', means that his being out is not the getting out of anything from anything; either from the viewpoint of being distant in space, area or environment. Thus divine existence and lordship over everything and tenseness of His nearness and the overwhelmingness of His coverage has no example. So also no there is no example of His separation from things.

Although to make it understandable instance can be given of the spirit and the rational soul of man. It is agreed that spirit is not a part of the body, but the body is under the control, and coverage of the soul which does not inhabit any particular part of the body. Thus it is both in the body as well as out of it. At the same time, it’s being in and out is not like the entrance and exit of a thing as mentioned earlier.

Also the soul is nearer to the body from the viewpoint of control and coverage. So also it is away from the body from the angle of actual existence in a place. It is independent and clear of physical ailments.

It would be clear that the nearness and remoteness of the Almighty Allah concerning the entire universe is above the nearness and remoteness of the soul from the body as mentioned.

Since man is unable to perceive the nearness and remoteness of the soul from the body it is all the more impossible for him to understand the form of nearness and remoteness of God from anything.

"(So glorified be Allah) Whom the height of intellectual courage cannot appreciate, and the divings of understanding cannot reach...”2

As for the question of the unity of existence, those who believe in it are of various sorts. Some say that there is only a Single Existence and that all other numerous existences are mere manifestation and illuminations of Him. They give the example of the sea and its waves. However this is illogical in the view of intelligent people. How can a sensible person believe that all these existences, having have their own specialties are all only imaginations and that they are no more than a single existence?

The example of the sea and its waves etc. are blatantly against the dictum of: "He is not like anything and He is above all that they attribute to Him." Moreover such belief leads to going out of the pale of faith. That is why Agha Sayyid Mohsin Hakim (t.s.), one of the Maraja Taqlid (a religious authority), writes in the commentary on Urwathul Wuthqa, regarding the believers in oneness of existence (Wahdatul Wujud)3 :

"Since religion wants us to have a good opinion about everyone who is a Muslim, we are also required to have a good opinion of their words and deeds. Therefore we may say that the aim of those who believe in oneness of existence (Wahdatul Wujud) is not what their words apparently show, which results in corruption including denial of the laws of Shariat although their real intention is correct. Otherwise the apparent words are against Shariat as mentioned earlier that:

سُبْحَانَ رَبِّكَ رَبِّ الْعِزَّةِ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ

"Glory be to your Lord, the Lord of Honor, above what they describe.” (As-Saffat,37: 180)

وَمَا قَدَرُوا اللَّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِ

"And they do not assign to Allah the attributes due to Him ...''4 (Al Anam 6:91)

Question 2: Refutation of Daur (dependence) and Tasalsul (postponement)

Q.2: Describe 'Daur' (dependence) and 'Tasalsul' (postponement) and please tell us how to reject them?

A: Daur means dependence of inquiring about a thing which also depends on knowing the former thing either directly or indirectly.5 Like dependence of A on B in the meaning that B is the cause of A and vice versa. Thus everything is both a cause and effect of the other, which is obviously wrong and illogical, because it makes one to believe in the falsehood that a thing is at a time both existing and non-existing. For example, A as an effect of B makes it both absent and non-existent, because B is also its effect.

Tasalsul means postponement of the inquiry about a thing on unending matters and the evitable consequence of which is that at no point in time that thing and all matters related to it do not exist, because it is impossible for a thing to exist before the existence of its cause. So when the chain of the cause and effect continues without break, we will have to believe that neither of them becomes non-existent. Therefore, we say quite logically that all existent things must end at an existence that exists by itself, because everything needs it for its existence. Hence the chain of existence must end with the cause of causes, which is self-existent.6

Question 3: Impossible to see the Almighty Allah

وَلَمَّا جَاءَ مُوسَىٰ لِمِيقَاتِنَا وَكَلَّمَهُ رَبُّهُ قَالَ رَبِّ أَرِنِي أَنْظُرْ إِلَيْكَ ۚ قَالَ لَنْ تَرَانِي وَلَٰكِنِ انْظُرْ إِلَى الْجَبَلِ فَإِنِ اسْتَقَرَّ مَكَانَهُ فَسَوْفَ تَرَانِي ۚ فَلَمَّا تَجَلَّىٰ رَبُّهُ لِلْجَبَلِ جَعَلَهُ دَكًّا وَخَرَّ مُوسَىٰ صَعِقًا ۚ فَلَمَّا أَفَاقَ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ تُبْتُ إِلَيْكَ وَأَنَا أَوَّلُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ

"And when Musa came at Our appointed time and his Lord spoke to him, he said: My Lord! show me (Thyself), so that I may look upon Thee. He said: You cannot (bear to) see Me but look at the mountain, if it remains firm in its place, then will you see Me ..." (Al A’araaf, 7: 143)

Question 3

Q.3: With reference to the above verse of the Holy Quran, Mamun Abbasid asked Imam Ridha’ (a.s.): Prophet Musa (a.s.) was a prophet and he knew that God cannot be seen. Then how did he ask for the same? Please narrate the summary of the reply given by the Imam to Abbasid to convince him.

A: The summary of the reply given by the Imam, as mentioned in Uyun Akhbar ar-Ridha’ is that he said: Prophet Musa (a.s.) did know that Allah cannot be seen by an eye as He is pure from being seen by an eye. But as he had informed his community that Almighty Allah had spoken to him, they said:

'We will not believe you unless we also hear the Word of God., So Musa (a.s.) took seventy persons and placed them at the foot of Mount Tur. He went up the hill and requested Allah to speak with him and make those people hear His words. So they heard the Word of God from six directions as He had created voice from the tree. But they insisted that would not trust him and testify that it was the Word of God unless and until they see God clearly. When they uttered this audacity, He sent down a thunderbolt on them, which killed them.

Musa (a.s.) said: 'My Lord, what shall I say when I return to Bani Israel? They will tell me: You took seventy men with you and got them killed.' God made them alive again. After being revived, they asked Musa (a.s.): 'O Musa, ask God to make Himself visible to you. Then tell us how is He? Then we would recognize Him as recognition deserves.

Musa (a.s.) replied: 'O people, Allah cannot be seen by a physical eye and He has no shape or likeness. He cannot be recognized with signs and examples.' But they insisted: 'We will not believe in you unless and until you ask God what we told you to. ' Musa (a.s.) said: 'My Lord, You have heard these people and only You know what is good for them, Then Musa (a.s.) got a revelation: 'Well, ask what they want You to ask. 'Musa (a.s.) said: 'O Lord, make Yourself visible to me.' The Almighty Allah said:

'You can never see Me, but just look at the mountain. If it remains intact you may see Me. ' When God made His majesty descend on the mountain, it shattered the mountain into particles; Musa (a.s.) fainted. When he recovered, he said: 'O Lord, You are above being visible. I repent for the ignorance of my people and I do know by the knowledge bestowed by You that You can never be seen and really I am the first of those who believe that You cannot be seen.'

Notes

1. Usul Kafi, Vol. I , Pg. 86

2. Nahjul Balagha. Subh i Salih. Sermon no.1. (We should know that the understanding of anything is a kind of coverage and superiority over that thing. It is obvious that a creation can never be superior to or above the Lord Creator whereby one may be able to know fully about Him. If a man thinks of tracing God he should know that he is after impossibility.

"'Mind can perceive God if a straw can reach the bottom of the sea."

In fact the maximum knowledge about God is to know the inability of ourselves to understand the Infallible One. Imam Baq ir (a.s.) has said in Usul Kafi:

“You talk about God but never talk about His Self, because discussion about God 's Self results only in confusion."

It is mentioned in another tradition: "'One who thinks how is God, has destroyed himself."

Therefore, instead of thinking about His Self and about nearness to Him, which cannot result except in confusion, you should ponder over the limitless powers and wisdoms of Almighty God, which are concealed in all the particles of the universe.

"In the eyes of the wise, the leaves of green trees are all like a whole file describing the Lord’s introduction".

Man must also keep in mind his littleness, powerlessness and ignorance and he should compare himself with the vast universe of existence and then recognize his inferiority and valuelessness so that he may not fall in the fallacy of trying to know the everlasting Self of the Great Creator of the cosmos.

"'In an assembly wherein the sun is like an atom, to consider oneself the centre is a kind of indiscipline indeed ."

And about what some unwise people say that how can one believe in a God who cannot be seen and whose howness cannot be understood by anyone we say in reply that is it correct to deny the existence of life, because man is unable to know about its truth. In this case also only its signs are understood by man. Similar is the case of lightning and the soul of man; their existence is obvious, though there is no way to find out their reality. We also ask such people: Do you have the intellect? If they reply positively, we may ask them: How do you believe in the existence of intelligence, which cannot be touched or seen and when you are unable to know about its howness? If they say: We don't have any intelligence, the matter is over and that is all.

The whole world is unanimous about His Divinity though it is unable to know anything about His self. Intelligence cannot reach His Howness (How He is). Nature cannot reach the knowledge of His attributes. Neither flight of imagination reach the height whereby it can now have the know-how of His qualities. All are absolutely incapable to encompass Him by any faculty of i ntelligence.

3. Musramsik. Vol. 1, Pg. 391

4. Some of Islamic scholars have opined that oneness of existence (Wahdatul Wujud) means the unity of the owner of ranks like Light (Noor) which is a true fact but it has different levels from the angle of high and low power. Likewise, existence is one truth and that He is necessarily Eternal and Everlasting by Himself and All-knowing and All-powerful by Himself and the ranks of other existences are having local and limited powers and such existences are innumerable.

Some have explained oneness of existence (Wahdatul Wujud) in various other ways and quoting them is unnecessary and would also be very lengthy.

5. (Daur in the terminology of philosophers and intellectuals means dependence of two things on one another. Daur is of two kinds:

1 - Daur e Masrah which is dependence of two things on one another in such a way that each one is dependent on the other like the example of text.

2 – Daur e Muzmir which means rotation which necessitates the dependence of a thing on itself through the medium of a third thing -

(Asfaar , Vol. l , p. 31).

6. To explain Daur and Tasalsul we can say that since wheat cultivation depends on wheat and similarly the production of a fowl depends on a existence of an egg and the production of the egg, in turn, depends on a fowl and the production of every living thing depends on the existence of the sperm in the womb of its mother and again the production of sperm depends on a being in whom the sperm must be there.

Thus you can see in these examples that the production of wheat depends on the production of wheat and the birth of an animal depends on the birth of an animal and this i s obviously a Daur.

And if this dependence is taken backward, we see a similar continuity (Tasalsu{). For example we may say that the production of wheat next year is dependan t on i ts cultivation in the last year and that cultivation on the cultivation two years back and again that three years ago and thus on that of a thousand years and so on. Likewise, the bird before us depends on the egg of an earlier bird and that from before that and thus it goes unendi ngly, which is impossible. So necessari ly we must say that in the beginning the Lord creator created an animal along wi th the arrangement of the production of seed and sperm for reproduction destined by Him.

Divine Justice (Adl)

وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ {54}

"And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners.” (Aale ‘Imran, 3:54)

Question 4

Q.4: What is the difference between planning (Makr) of God and the planning (Makr) of a man?

A: Makr of man consists of deceit and cheating to which a fellow resorts with a view to save himself or to overcome others or to fulfill his corrupt wishes.

But the Makr of Almighty Allah is a form of punishment, revenge and anger against man 's evil deed. This chastisement is kept secret from the man. The sinner does not know that he is under God's anger. For example, respiting the infidels and transgressors, so that their disobedience may multiply thereby making them liable to a greater chastisement in the Hereafter:

إِنَّمَا نُمْلِي لَهُمْ لِيَزْدَادُوا إِثْمًا ۚ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُهِينٌ

"We grant them respite only that they may add to their sins ...” (Aale ‘lmran, 3: 178)

Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) said:

"By God, God did not chastise them more severely than by respiting them (so that their sins may increase and so also their punishment consequently)."

Also it is like 'gradual arrest ' (lstidraaj), in which whenever a person indulges in a new sin, Allah grants him a new favor, so that by remaining occupied in that blessing, the sinner may not realize that he is disobedient to Allah and that he may not repent for his sins.

It is narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.): "When a servant is under the kindness and mercy of Allah and when Allah desires good for him, He puts him into trouble after he has committed a sin so that he may repent and be reminded of Allah and that he may purify himself of that sin. On the other hand, when Allah is enraged with a man, He bestows him a new blessing as a result of which he forgets repentance and continues to sin. This is what the Almighty Allah says:

وَالَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا سَنَسْتَدْرِجُهُمْ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

"We draw them near (to destruction) by degrees from whence they know not. "(Al Araaf 7: 182)1

As regards calling this kind of divine punishment a Makr it is that the Makr of men, is both selfish and oppressive. This chastisement from Allah is by way of recompense based on justice. It is a similar action, but different in its aim. Moreover, Makr of men, due to weakness and lack of encompassing is mostly a failure, whereas a similar Makr from Allah is perfect in power and effectiveness, which fulfils its aim. That is why He Himself says:

وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ

''And Allah is the best of planners." (Aale ’lmran, 3:54)

اللَّهُ أَسْرَعُ مَكْرً

"Allah is quicker to plan ...” (Yunus, l0:21)

وَأُمْلِي لَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّ كَيْدِي مَتِينٌ

"And I grant them respite; surely My scheme is effective.” (Al A’araaf, 7: 183)

Or since divine punishment is effective against Makr of man it is true to call it as a Makr from Allah. For example:

وَجَزَاءُ سَيِّئَةٍ سَيِّئَةٌ مِثْلُهَ

"And the recompense of evil is punishment like it..." (Ash-Shura 42:40)

In fact the compensation of an evil is, in fact, not an evil as it based on justice, but it is all right to call it as such. Just as it is correct to say that the consequence of evil is evil and likewise to say that the recompense of a person's Makr is a Makr against him. However, divine Makr is never condemnable. On the contrary it is justice and that is why the Makr of man is called a bad Makr:

ۚ وَلَا يَحِيقُ الْمَكْرُ السَّيِّئُ إِلَّا بِأَهْلِهِ ۚ

"..and the evil plans shall not beset any save the authors of it..."(Al Fatir, 35:42)

We should know that planning (Makr) and excuse (Heela) is in the meaning of a remedy and planning through hidden means for getting a benefit or to avoid harm. It is of two kinds:

The good planning, which is from the Merciful God and bad and devilish planning.

1. The good planning is that which is through permissible means and which is for getting permissible gain, in which one plans correctly and rightly. And it is to save oneself or others from harms and to be protected from oppression. In short, a remedial measure or planning for rightful aims is all right from both the viewpoint of wisdom and as well as Shariat laws. It is both desirable and meritorious.

2. Bad planning (Makr) is that which is done for devilish aims. For example: to plan to make money through unlawful means or to harm others or to obstruct the truth.

This is with regard to Makr of man, but Makr of God, is doubtlessly, the correct planning, which is both right and praiseworthy as it foils the devilish designs of unjust. It returns to them the losses of their Makr. It enables religion and its supporters to win over the enemies.

Another point is that divine planning is by way of retribution and furthermore it is against the designs of sinners and unjust and is a plan against their plans.

To understand the meaning of divine Makr look at the following verses of the Holy Quran:

وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ وَمَكَرُوا وَمَكَرَ اللَّهُ

"And they planned and Allah (also) planned, and Allah is the best of planners.” (Aal ‘Imran, 3:54)

It means: Jews and enemies of Christ planned to eliminate him and his law. In other words, they plotted and through devilish means, tried to obstruct the divine call. God also then made a plan against them to save the life of Christ and to protect his Shariat. He took remedial measures and foiled their plans and, of course, God is the best solution for those who inquire.

A person named Yahuda was a companion of His Eminence, Isa Masih (a.s.), but he was a hypocrite and a spy. At night when Isa (a.s.) was alone and none of his companions were with him, Yahuda informed the Jews of his whereabouts.

It was a dark night. The Jews told Yahuda: "Go in and bring out Isa so that we may kill him." When Yahuda arrived, Almighty Allah saved Isa (a.s.) and Yahuda could not see him; so he returned to the Jews while Allah had made his face exactly like that of Isa (a.s.). They apprehended him and when he cried that he is Yahuda and not Isa, they did not pay any heed to him and they finally killed him. Some have said that from the very beginning, Yahuda resembled Isa (a.s.) and that during that night he was apprehended and executed by the Jews.

وَاللَّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ وَيَمْكُرُونَ وَيَمْكُرُ اللَّهُ

"And when those who disbelieved devised plans against you that they might confine you or slay you or drive you away; and they devised plans and Allah too had arranged a plan; and Allah is the best of planners.” (Al Anfaal, 8:30)

It means that the leaders of Quraish gathered in Darun Nadwah to plot about driving away Prophet Muhammad (s.a:w.s.). Abul Bakhtari suggested: "He should be tightly chained and imprisoned in a closed room; and food and water be sent to him daily until he dies therein."

Shaykh Najdi said: "This is a defective suggestion, because Bani Hashim and their supporters would free him."

Hisham bin Amr said: "'Muhammad must be tied to the back of a camel, which should be driven out to the desert, so that he may starve to death."

Shaykh Najdi said: "He would certainly meet Arab tribals on the way and he would attract them; and they will save him. Finally he would join hands with them to fight us."

Abu Jahl said: "In my opinion, we should recruit a person from every clan so that all of them jointly kill him and thus his blood money may be shared by various different clans. In this way, Bani Hashim will not be able to fight all the tribes and consequently be obliged to accept blood money."

Shaykh Najdi said: "This is the best option." Some have said that it was the opinion of Shaykh Najdi from the very beginning and that all had agreed to it later.

So Abu Jahl recruited one person from every family. They resolved that one night all of them should gather outside the house of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) and then assassinate him jointly.

Jibraeel (a.s.) informed the Messenger of Allah about the planning of Quraish and told him that it is the command of Allah that he should leave Mecca. So the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) told Amirul Momineen (a.s.): "Remain in my place and sleep in my bed so that the Quraish may not find it vacant and follow me." Then he went out of his house to the cave of Thawr.

The Quraish sent a spy to his house who came back to inform them that Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) was in his house; so they surrounded the house that night. At dawn, they finally entered the house fully armed to eliminate the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) but Amirul Momineen (a.s.) arose from the bed and demanded: "'What do you want?"

They replied: "We want Muhammad, where is he?" Ali (a.s.) replied: "I am not a watchman over him." They turned back from there and with the help of an expert tracker reached the cave of Thawr. But by divine command, spiders weaved webs at the mouth of that cave so thickly that, seeing it, the Quraish remarked: "Had Muhammad entered this cave, these webs would have been destroyed. Therefore it is clear that he has not entered it." So they returned from there. Three days later, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) migrated to Medina.

The above incident well explains what the Makr of polytheists of Mecca meant and that it was a devilish and oppressive Makr and that the Makr of Allah was by way of retribution and that it was totally just.

Question 5

Q. 5. Kindly explain the following tradition with examples:

‘‘Neither, fatalism nor free will,· it is a matter between the two extremes2

A: No fatalism means there is no force or compulsion, whereby man may, in his good or bad deeds, be absolutely helpless like a mere instrument of the will of God; that he may not have any power or choice. Falseness of belief in fatalism is one of the self-evident truths, because every sensible person, by conscience knows that he is having a free will and that his voluntary deeds are not like trembling etc. which is involuntarily. Therefore Muhaqqiq Qummi in his Kitabe Qawanin writes:

"Even if the fatalists bring thousands of arguments in favor of fatalism, they are proved baseless and false before self-evident things."

Moreover, this fatalism essentially falsifies the theory of reward and punishment in the Hereafter because, one who is helpless in the matter of obedience or disobedience (good or bad deeds), is logically not entitled to any reward or punishment. He does not deserve either to be praised or criticized even in this world. The fact is that if one commits a bad deed, all wise people consider him guilty and liable to criticism and punishment. No one considers him helpless.

Free will is also not possible as it would mean that man is able to do everything he desires; that he has full and total authority and ability to do whatever he wants in every matter. This belief is also false according to conscience, like the falsity of fatalism, because every sane person has experience that in many matters, he desired something, but it was not achieved due to some hindrance between his wish and the deed desired by him. He failed to do what he wanted to. Sometimes he even faces the exact opposite of his wish.

Therefore Amirul Momineen (a.s.) is reported to have said: "I recognized God through the failure of desires and inability to achieve wanted things."3 Is there any sane person who considers himself able to do whatever he wants? He knows very well that:

"Neither his profit nor his loss nor his death nor his life nor his rising is in his control."4

Also, the requisite of this belief of Free will adopted by the Mutazali is that they believe in 'associates' of Allah, because when they believe that man has absolute power to do whatever he desires, they consider themselves to have the rank of the Almighty Allah (Who alone is All-Powerful with absolute authority over everything). Some of the words of the Mutazalieven negate God's power vis a vis man 's.

"'But it is a matter between two matters." Man is neither totally without freedom of choice about what he likes nor does he has absolute power to do everything he desires. On the contrary, in all voluntary affairs, he requires the will of God to be in favor of his desired deed.

Otherwise what he wants to do will not be done. Likewise, he also requires the will of God in every affair. Also in all good deeds, people are in need of the grace of God. Also evil and sinful deeds of disobedience are due to the allowance granted by God. Of course, both the grace and allowance depend on the wish of man. That is why Amirul Momineen (a.s.) said in reply to a person's question about the meaning of: "There is no power or might except by Allah," that:

"There is no power in us in the matter of disobeying God, except under the allowance of God. Likewise we don't have any ability in performing good deeds except with the assistance of Allah."

In another tradition, he said:

“Good is by the grace of God and evil is due to the allowance granted by God."

Question 6

Q.6: Perhaps there are some people in Australia, Africa or America who have never even heard about Islam or about its rules and regulations. What their position will be after death?

A: Indeed such people will not be chastised after their death. They will not be questioned. From the viewpoint of logic and Islamic law they do not attract divine anger and punishment.

It is common sense that holding them responsible would be against Divine Justice, as arguments have not been exhausted for them. As regards the divine law, it is mentioned in Quran that:

إِلَّا الْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالنِّسَاءِ وَالْوِلْدَانِ لَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ حِيلَةً وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ سَبِيلًا

فَأُولَٰئِكَ عَسَى اللَّهُ أَنْ يَعْفُوَ عَنْهُمْ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًا

"Except the weak from among the men and the children who have neither in their power the means nor can they find a way (to escape); so these, it may be, Allah will pardon them, and Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving. " (An-Nisa, 4:98,99)

It is mentioned in Kifayatul Muwahhideen: The 'weak ' may include men and women who lack intelligence and arguments might not have been presented and exhausted for them.5

Such people might not have known anything about Islam and faith or may not have the means or power to get such information. Perhaps they are silly, mad, deaf or dumb and those who lived in the days of ignorance and died therein. In other words all those are 'weak' for whom arguments have not been exhausted.

Infidels are those, who during their lives, did not cultivate faith in God and Judgment Day and died in a state of disbelief. Transgressors are sinners and oppressors; they are unjust people, who committed evil deeds and who died without repenting. Punishment to them after their death depends upon their defaults. If they were helpless, they will not be chastised and if they were defaulters, their punishment will be in accordance with their faults.

Here helplessness is in the meaning of falling short. For example, a person is only one meter tall and his food or medicine is out of his reach. If he dies, he will not be punished after death. But if one is able to take the food or medicine, but keeps sitting and consequently dies. Such a person is indeed a defaulter and hence responsible; and will be punished for committing suicide.6

Therefore those who, due to lack of intelligence could not get faith in God, the Hereafter and other true beliefs and die in that state of ignorance, are weak and not liable to divine punishment and so also those to whom true beliefs never reached till the end of their lives, or if reached, they could not find a way to obtain them and thus were really disabled. In other words, all those who were truly weak and who did not make a default will not be punished.

Transgressors are those who commit sins whose evil and unlawfulness is known to them through natural human sense like killing someone without a cause and oppressing others or being excessive to others; such people are not weak, on the contrary they are defaulters. Thus, a disbeliever who is weak from the viewpoint of his infidelity - if he kills someone wrongfully - after his death he will not be punished for his infidelity due to his inability to know the truth. But he will, anyhow, be chastised for manslaughter. It is so because with regard to his faith, he can say: I had no way of finding the true faith. But from the viewpoint of manslaughter, he cannot say: I did not know that it was an offence. Though he had not heard the commandments of God and religion, his nature and common sense has exhausted the argument for him.

As regards sins proved from the viewpoint of religion, like missing or giving up of prayers and fasts etc.; if he was really helpless, as mentioned earlier in detail, he will not be questioned and punished.

Question 7

Q.7: It is hard for common sense to understand the verse of the Holy Quran which says:

يُضِلُّ اللَّهُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَيَهْدِي مَنْ يَشَاءُ ۚ

"Thus does Allah make err whom He pleases ...” (Al-Muddaththir, 74:31)

Please explain in detail.

A: This holy verse carries several meanings:

One is regarding knowledge about the Almighty Allah's authority over guidance and misguidance for anyone whom He wishes and that He is able to draw him to good or evil willy-nilly, but since withdrawal of free will is against Divine wisdom, He does not do so, because if He does so, one cannot be either rewarded or punished. Therefore the verse only informs us about God's ability and it does not mean that he really takes this step.

Another reason is that the meaning of guidance in this verse is not showing of the way as the same has already been conveyed to all responsible beings through prophets and Imams (a.s.). Similarly the meaning of guidance here is also not the attaining of the aim without free will or intention of man, because it too negates ones being entitled to reward or punishment.

Hence what is meant by guidance and misguidance in this verse is divine sense (Taufeeq) or abandoning (Khizlaan). Taufeeq means that the Almighty Allah pays special attention to His servant and makes the path of good easy for him thereby making him inclined to good and by increasing his desire to do good. He provides for him the means, which help him succeed and does not withhold from him means which can keep him away from sinning.

The perfect kind of such guidance is that by which God makes His servant taste the sweetness of good and the bitterness of evil. It i s obvious that such guidance, which facilitates the path of success, does not conflict with or does not negate man's free will. Therefore the meaning of this verse is: God sheds His favor on His servant by providing him with all the means of success to whoever He wants and deprives those He wants of His favors and leaving such a person to himself (to do whatever he likes).

But it should be clear that the will of Allah is not random; it is in accordance with the entitlement of man to get guidance or misguidance. Man makes himself eligible of God's favor by following and accepting the call of the divine prophets.

وَالَّذِينَ اهْتَدَوْا زَادَهُمْ هُدًى وَآتَاهُمْ تَقْوَاهُمْ

"And (as for) those who follow the right direction, He increases them in guidance and gives them their guarding (against evil).,,” (Muhammad, 47: 17)

Since guidance and good sense (Taufeeq) of God has stages, when God grants His favor and the servant accepts it thankfully, he becomes entitled to a higher rank. Likewise it is also possible that a man by his inclination to evil may make himself eligible for misguidance and deprivation.

Other interpretations of this verse are also there, but for now this should suffice.

Question 8

Q.8: The Satan was a monotheist and now also he is a monotheist How then would this verse not apply to him?

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَغْفِرُ أَنْ يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَٰلِكَ لِمَنْ يَشَاءُ ۚ وَمَنْ يُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا

"Surely Allah does not forgive that anything should be associated with Him, and He forgives what is besides this to whom He pleases ..." (An- Nisa, 4: 1 16)

A: It is true that Satan was not a polytheist in the beginning, because polytheism means to take someone as a partner of God in His creation, obedience or worship. Such polytheism was not there in the devil; but disbelief is worse than polytheism, because it is to give up the obedience of Almighty Allah due to enmity or ego; and according to Quran, Satan was a disbeliever, which is worse than being a polytheist.

أَبَىٰ وَاسْتَكْبَرَ وَكَانَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ

"…He refused and he was proud, and he was one of the unbelievers." (Al Baqarah, 2:34)

And in Al-Kafi it is narrated from Zurarah that Imam Baqir (a.s.) said: By Allah, disbelief is older than polytheism and so also dirtier and more serious. Then the Imam recalled the disbelief of lblis when Allah ordered him to prostrate before Adam, but he disobeyed.7 Thus infidelity is graver than polytheism.

Imam Sadiq (a.s.) was asked which of the two: disbelief and polytheism is older? He replied that disbelief is older, because Iblis was the first to become a disbeliever and his disbelief was not like polytheism, because he did not invite others to worship anyone other than God and, in fact, thereafter he extended such an invitation and became a polytheist.8

It is clear from the tradition that Satan is both a disbeliever as well as a polytheist, but his disbelief is due to the fact that he disobeyed God's command and in other words denied the Lordship, divinity and His right to be obeyed and worshipped. In a tradition of Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) such disbelief is named as ultimate disbelief.

But the cursed one's being a polytheist is because he became damned and engaged himself in misguiding human beings. He called to polytheism; and things like idol-worship etc. are his inventions only. It is obvious that invention of polytheism and trapping people into it is a thousand times worse than his personal polytheism so the cursed one is the first disbeliever and the chief of the polytheists.

This summary of this question is that the Almighty Allah has said in Quran that Allah would not forgive one who associates others with Him and, excepting the sin of polytheism, He would forgive the sins of whomsoever He wishes.

Therefore, since Satan, in the beginning, only refused to prostrate for Adam, he had not associated anyone with God, that is, he had not committed polytheism; his sin is worth forgiveness.

The gist of the reply is that Satan was a disbeliever from the beginning and thereafter led man to disbelief and he also became a polytheist and encouraged people to various kinds of polytheism. From the very beginning till now, he has no faith in Allah. If it is said that Satan had accepted God and had believed in the Creator of the universe and that he only refused to obey His Commandment, then we reply that only to testify that there is a creator of the world of existence is not faith in Allah.

Faith in God means one must accept Allah as the creator, nourisher and upbringer of oneself and of every particle in the universe and also one must believe that he and all the things of the world are due to Allah only, and he should not consider himself and others as existing by themselves. He must also regard only Allah as worthy of worship. Thus he should surrender before only one God and to fear Him and to humble before Him. Only such a person is a believer in Allah.

Thus one who considers himself independent, like lblis, crosses the limits of being His servant and shows his own opinion, rather who considers his own opinion higher than the command of God and thus shows pride against God, has doubtlessly become a denier of God's Godship and Lordship and of His being the only deity worth worship. Such a person will not get a place except in Hell.

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ عَنْ عِبَادَتِي سَيَدْخُلُونَ جَهَنَّمَ دَاخِرِينَ {60}

"...surely those who are too proud for My service shall soon enter Hell abased. " (Al- Ghafir, 40:60)

Question 9

Q.9: It is said that in Ethereal Sphere (Aalame Zarr)9 the souls chose either righteousness or wretchedness. Now if it was forced, it is injustice and if it was volluntary, and if they possessed intelligence, how did they choose it? But if they had no sense, it would be improper to hold them accountable and to punish them. Please describe the circumstances in Ethereal Sphere (Aalame Zarr).

A: Allamah Majlisi (r.a.) has, in volume 3 of Biharul Anwar , quoted many narrations related to inborn human disposition (Teenat). Aalame Zarr and about taking of the covenant. It can be summarized as follows:

The Almighty created from the loins of His Eminence, Adam, the father of humanity, his progeny so that He may bring them out on Judgment Day in the form of particles as small as tiny ants. So in the beginning also they were like tiny ants. Thereafter the Almighty Allah connected their souls to their bodies. At that time also they possessed perfect wisdom and intelligence. They also had a perfectly free will.

Then, after taking covenant from them about His being only Allah One God and about His messengers and Imams (a.s.) He asked: “Am I not your Lord?" A number of them who were the right-siders, said obediently and enthusiastically: ''Yes of course," and thus they confessed and testified to the truth. The remaining, who were left-siders, hesitatingly and with disinclination said, 'Yes'. Then God took their test by bringing before them a fire. He ordered them to enter it. The former entered and the fire became cool for them. The remaining did not obey and did not enter and this test was taken thrice.

As regards the research and meaning of Teenat, Aalame Zarr and covenant, scholars of religion have three opinions:

The first is the school of traditionists who say that these traditions are ambiguous and to understand them is beyond us and it is enough to have faith in them and we should understand that the Imams (a.s.) know their meanings.

Another school of thought is that of Shaykh Mufeed, Sayyid Murtaza and Tabarsi, author of Majmaul Bayan and other commentators of Quran and their followers. They are of the opinion that traditions about Teenat and verses and narrations relating to covenant taking are figurative, allegoric and metaphoric with reference to the details mentioned in Sharh Kafi and Bihar; especially with regard to Aalame Zar, Shaykh Mufid (r.a.) says:

"The correct report is that the Almighty Allah brought out from the loins of Adam, his progeny like tiny ants and filled up the horizon therewith. Then He divided it into three pans. Some had effulgence (Noor) without darkness (Zulmat) and they were the selected ones who were pure of sins. Some were all darkness without light and they were the infidels who never did obey. Some others had a combination of both. They are those who obey and also disobey, among the believers.

The reason behind bringing out the progeny of Adam in this manner was that the Almighty Allah intended to introduce the numerosity of Adam's progeny to him and also to show His Might and Kingdom; to amaze him by His creation and to make him understand what was to happen after him. As regards the traditional reports containing the Almighty Allah's Words:

“am I not your lord...till the end”, its reply is that they are only solitary traditions and hence not quite reliable. On the contrary he says that they are forged.

Thereafter Shaykh Mufeed referred to the holy verse:

وَإِذْ أَخَذَ رَبُّكَ مِنْ بَنِي آدَمَ مِنْ ظُهُورِهِمْ ذُرِّيَّتَهُمْ وَأَشْهَدَهُمْ عَلَىٰ أَنْفُسِهِمْ أَلَسْتُ بِرَبِّكُمْ ۖ قَالُوا بَلَىٰ ۛ شَهِدْنَا ۛ أَنْ تَقُولُوا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِنَّا كُنَّا عَنْ هَٰذَا غَافِلِينَ

"And when your Lord brought forth from the children of Adam, from their backs, their descendants, and made them bear witness again.d their own souls: Am I not your Lord? They said: Yes! we bear witness. Lest you should say on the day of resurrection: Surely we were heedless of this.” (Al A’raaf, 7: 172)

Shaykh Mufeed said that this divine covenant was taken from the progeny of Adam whereby they admitted that Allah is the Creator of everything and that He is the Lord nourisher of everything and everyone and that He is the Only One God.

This truth, which all of them accepted was not merely a verbal covenant and it did not relate only to the time of Adam, the father of mankind. Rather it is a covenant, which is divinely created and which has remained with every human being along with his creation. In other words, the feeling of finding and knowing God and a capability to and readiness to accept the truth of God 's oneness and uniqueness is present in the soul of everyone right from their creation and this feeling about God 's existence is there in the mind of everyone as a self-understood matter. It is a divinely created instinct.

In this way, all human beings have the spirit of belief in only one God and a natural demand to worship only Him is made in the language of creation. Likewise, the answer to this question has also been in the same language. The summary of this question and answer and the covenant is a natural agreement, the signs of which are found by everyone even today in his or her heart.

So much so that modern psychologists too have found in their latest researches that religious awareness is innate in man which every human being finds in himself automatically. It is the same natural sense that has guided people to God throughout the ages. Every intelligent man who pays attention to his divinely bestowed instinct understands that he is a creation of a Creator and he is nourished by a nourisher and sustainer.

If you put something before a three or four-year-old child, he too, before extending h is hand, looks at the one who has placed that thing before him and as a result of his natural understanding follows that everything is brought by someone. There are many things in the Holy Quran and other texts which deal with questions and answers about man's natural faculties and abilities, which are omitted here due to exigency.

The third school of thought followed by many earlier and later day scholars says that all narrations about Teenat, Aalame Zarr and covenant are correct and their apparent meanings are also correct and there is no inconsistency between them and any logic or religious rules and principles.

If someone says that as a consequent of these narrations, one can say that there is compulsion in religion, because, in Aalame Zarr whatever a man accepted was involuntary, without an alternative, we reply that:

Firstly, whatever everyone confessed in that world was by his or her choice and understanding as said earlier. Rather some have even said that the wisdom of everyone in that world was greater than it is today.

Secondly, the tenor of the reports in this regard is that matters accepted in that world were never forced whereby in this facsimile world, everything must be accepted and acted upon. Rather it is possible that there may be a change as mentioned in a tradition in which Amirul Momineen (a.s.) is reported to have said:

"The Lord of the worlds stipulated change in destiny (Bada) in the left-sided folks."

That is, those who, in that world, willingly revolted and disobeyed became the left-sided folks. If they repent and obey the messengers of God, the Lord changes their destiny and places them among the right-sided folks as such a change is very much possible. That is why it is mentioned in the supplication of the holy month of Ramadan:

"If I am to be thrown into calamities, cancel my encounter with such misfortunes and write my name in the list of those who have been blessed to be fortunate, because You have said in Your Book:

يَمْحُو اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ ۖ وَعِنْدَهُ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ

"Allah makes to pass away and establishes what He pleases, and with Him is the basis of' the Book." (Ar- Ra’ad, 13:39)

As regards the question about their being intelligent and how they preferred to put themselves in a loss? We say that such exclamation is out of place, because it is often seen that many wise and intelligent people, in several matters, knowingly and voluntarily do things which harm them and thereafter repent for their misdeeds. Likewise, the accursed Satan knowingly and intentionally disobeyed God's command and refused to prostrate before Adam (a.s.).

Question 10: Where is the avenger of the martyrs of Kerbala?

Where is the avenger of the martyrs of Kerbala?10

Q.10: Mukhtar punished the killers of Imam Husain (a.s.) and their chastisement in the Hereafter is at the discretion of Allah. Would they become alive during the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) and bepunished for a second time?

A: According to the sayings of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), Imam Mahdi (a.s.) would kill those from the progeny of killers of His Eminence, Chief of Martyrs, Imam Husain (a.s.), who are pleased by the said killing and who pride upon the oppression committed by their forefathers and thus, are participants intentionally, verbally and actively. As regards the killers of the Imam (a.s.), we have not received solid proofs that they will be enlivened and taken revenge from, although it is mentioned in a number of traditions that during the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.), the Almighty Allah will enliven many disbelievers so that they may observe the kingdom of Aale Muhammad (a.s.) and that revenge may be taken from them.

It is possible that the killers of Imam Husain (a.s.) may also be among them. As regards the statement that Mukhtar has punished them, firstly, it is not certain that Mukhtar punished all of them. Maybe those who were not killed by Mukhtar may be killed by Imam Mahdi (a.s.). Secondly, we may say that there is no hindrance in the matter of making a dead one alive and then killing him in this world at the hands of Imam Mahdi (a.s.), because, it cannot be called sufficient even if the killers of a prophet or an Imam are killed a thousand times. As for the rule that a murder is punishable only by killing the murderer once it is so only because killing anyone a second time is not practicable in this world and not because he should be killed only once.

Hence there is no doubt that those killed by Mukhtar would again be killed by Imam Mahdi (a.s.) by the command of Allah and it will be perfect justice, but the actual point is that it is not quite certain and agreed upon, as mentioned earlier. For further details, please refer to Tafsir Burhan under the interpretation of the following verse:

وَمَنْ قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيِّهِ سُلْطَانًا فَلَا يُسْرِفْ فِي الْقَتْلِ ۖ إِنَّهُ كَانَ مَنْصُورًا

"...and whoever is slain unjustly, We have indeed given to his heir authority so let him not exceed the just limits in slaying; surely he is aided.” (Al Isra 17:33)

Question 11

Q.11: Please explain 'change of destiny' (Bada) in a convincing manner.

A: Change of destiny (Bada) in the created world is like the cancellation of decrees in the legal sense. Thus canceJlation of a legal command means withdrawal of the earlier order and establishment of another due to a change in divine strategy.

Likewise, Bada means change made by God in the affairs of His servants through change in strategy like removal of a calamity as a result of supplication or charity extension in lifespan because of good behavior with relatives etc. For example, the calamity which had befallen the community of Prophet Yunus (a.s.) was removed due to its earnest supplications.

According to a narration in Biharul Anwar, Imam Sadiq (a.s.) is reported to have said that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said: Verily a person behaves nicely with his relatives as a result of which the Almighty Allah makes the remainder of three years in his lifespan into thirty years. It also so happens that a person behaves badly with his relations and as a result, the Almighty Allah turns the remainder of thirty years of his life into only three years. Then he (s.a.w.s.) said:

يَمْحُو اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ

"Allah makes to pass away and establishes what He pleases ...” (Ar-Ra’ad, 13:39)

It is also mentioned in Biharul Anwar, Vol. 17, that Amirul Momineen (a.s.) said: The number of death due to abundance of sins are more than deaths due to the arrival of the appointed day and the number of persons living as a result of good deeds is more than the lives reaching their destined lifespans.11 Making changes in the destiny of man due to his deeds is one of the honors of the Almighty Allah, concerning His Lordship and sovereignty. It also leads people to turn earnestly to Him and to perform good deeds. Therefore, the Holy Imams (a.s.) have accorded much importance to it.

Imam Baqir (a.s.) is reported to have said that God has not been worshipped through anything like belief in Bada ; that is, they have considered trust in Bada a great belief. It is also said in another narration that God has not considered anything greater than belief in Bada.

It is mentioned in Al-Kafi that Imam Baqir (a.s.) said that God did not appoint any messenger unless and until He took covenant from him on three matters:

1. His worship

2. Belief in His oneness and uniqueness

3. Belief that He advances whatever He wishes and delays whatever He likes.12

It is also mentioned in Al-Kafi that Imam Sadiq (a.s.) said:

"If people knew how much reward is there in the belief in Bada, they would not tire talking about it."13

As regards the reason of naming it as Bada, it denotes manifestation of a thing after its remaining hidden. It does not mean that the Almighty Allah changed the destiny because He was wrong the first time (God forbid!) So whenever He makes a change in affairs of any of His servants, it is said: Bada has occurred; that is, what was hidden has now become manifest.

In other words, God made manifest what was hidden to people because of absence of information about the causes. This is also the aim of Imam Sadiq 's (a.s.) saying:

“Allah has not manifested anything as He manifested in the case of Ismail, (who was son of the Imam)."

This is a hint to another tradition which says: It was decreed for Ismail to be killed twice. Then I requested the Lord to remove the calamity and He removed his assassination."

Question 12

Q.12: Blackness and whiteness, blindness and sight, ugliness and beauty, wisdom and lunacy; these things show lack of justice. The ugly one and the blind is deprived of many bounties of this world and such persons can perform fewer good deeds. Will they be compensated in the Hereafter? Would they be punished if they die as infidels? Should they be losers in both the worlds?

A: Difference in the creation of men, like deformity and beauty, perfection in stature and defects therein as well as all other drawbacks like poverty and wealth, health and illness etc. All these things carry wisdom and strategies behind them. Here we shall mention some of them:

Firstly: Things are known by their opposite. If there is no ugliness, how will one understand beauty? If there is no perfection, defectiveness will never be recognized and so on.

Secondly: Such differences are there so that the overall might of God may be manifested: that He is powerful over everything. In certain cases, this difference is to show God 's kindness or anger.

Thirdly: For some persons, their benefit lies in ugliness or blindness or, for instance, poverty and illness etc. If they really come to know the truth behind everything, they would prefer what Allah has destined for them.

It is narrated that one of the prophets was walking near the banks of a river when he observed some children; among whom was a blind child and other children were harassing him. Sometimes they also forced the blind child's head in water. That prophet was moved and he prayed to the Almighty Allah to bestow sight to that blind boy. His prayer was answered and the blind boy was given sight. But after that he began to drown the other children right away. The prophet exclaimed: "My Lord, You know the best! Please return him to his earlier condition." There are many examples testifying to this truth.

Fourthly: Differences between people are for their test and for manifestation of their righteousness and wickedness, because the afflicted are being tested in the matter of patience and submission to the will of God and thereby they are raised to the status of patient ones and those who are given bounties and abilities are tested in the matter of thankfulness and obedience to God with regard to their behavior with the disabled. It is, therefore, said:

وَجَعَلْنَا بَعْضَكُمْ لِبَعْضٍ فِتْنَةً أَتَصْبِرُونَ

"...and We have made some of you a trial for others; will you bear patiently?' " (Al Furqan, 25:20)

As regards compensation of depravities, there is no doubt that such compensation will be made fully and in a nice way. One of the beautiful names of God is Jabbar, meaning: The Compensator. It is an established principle in religious philosophy that Almighty Allah compensates for every trouble, hardship, calamity and deprivation in proportion to the person’s contentment with divine will. But of course, this applies only to things, which are only from Allah, having no interference of anyone else.

It is narrated in Al- Kafi under the chapter of "Distress of the faithful" that lbne Abi Ya'fur once complained to Imam Sadiq (a.s.) about the pains, which he was suffering continuously. Imam (a.s.) replied:

··o Abdullah, if a believer comes to know the quantum of reward for a pain and calamity, he would wish to be shredded into pieces. "14

It is mentioned volume 11 of Biharul Anwar that Abu Basir, a visually challenged gentleman, once came to Imam Baqir (a.s.) and asked: "Is it true that you can enliven the dead and cure a leper?" The Imam replied: "Yes, by the command of Allah." Abu Basir asked the Imam to cure his blindness.

Imam (a.s.) said: Come near me. Then he passed his holy hand over Abu Basir's eyes and the latter was able to see. He said: "Now I can see everything."

Imam (a.s.) asked: "Would you like to remain like this (and get worldly benefits) and be Iikc others (bearing pains and hardshi s of Hereafter) or you would wish to return to your earlier condition and enter Paradise without accounting for anything?"

Abu Basir replied: "I prefer blindness," and the Imam returned him to his earlier state.

This tradition shows that in lieu of the trouble of blindness in this world, one will be spared hardships of accounting of life­ long deeds in the Hereafter.

It is also mentioned in many narrations that on Judgment Day, the Most Merciful God will show sympathy to those who suffered in the world and whose prayers were not answered due to some strategy and He would tell them: "'Today, I will give you whatever you ask for." The compensation will be so generous that everyone would wish that none of his wishes had been fulfilled in the world.

As regards the fate of those who were deprived due to general strategy of the world or for some special strategy, and who also died in a state of infideli ty; that can they be called as losers in both the world?

Our reply is: Since deprivation of such persons from divine compensation in the other world is because of their voluntary disbelief, this matter is out of question as a disbeliever has no share in the Hereafter.

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَظْلِمُ النَّاسَ شَيْئًا وَلَٰكِنَّ النَّاسَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ يَظْلِمُونَ

"Surely Allah does not do any injustice to men, but men are unjust to themselves. " (Surah Yunus, I 0:44)

Question 13

Q.13: Two righteous people live in this world, one for 30 years and another for 60. The first objects to God: Why could I not remain alive longer like my brother in order to worship more and earn more reward...? What is the answer?

A: More or less of deeds is from the viewpoint of either quantity: such as one remains awake for a year engaging oneself in ritual prayer, recitations and also fasts during days and utilizes his wealth to fulfill only his genuine needs and donates the rest to charity; or it is from the viewpoint of quality.

For example, one only offers the obligatory evening and night prayer with full concentration, humility, fear and respect, and then he goes to sleep. Such prayer is of course better than one that does not have these qualities though one may remain engaged in prayer all night. It is mentioned in Biharul Anwar that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said:

"Two units of ritual prayer offered with sincerity are better than a whole night of worship."15

Moreover, the deed of one who has more piety is higher in quality; and more likely to be granted a greater reward. There are many examples of this.

After this preface, we can say that it is possible that one who had a lifespan of only thirty years, but he spent his life in worship; he may have got more good sense whereby his deeds might have become better than one who lived for sixty years. Therefore, there is no scope of such a doubt.

Second reply: It is possible that one lives and worships for thirty years and then God makes him die in such conditions that had he lived longer, he would have faced such trials and hardships and changes in life, whereby it would not have been possible for him to perform more good deeds; on the contrary he would have been likely to lose whatever good he had earned and, finally, on Judgment Day he might have realized that his death at that time was a great and special mercy of God on him. Thus there is no scope to ask why he did not get a longer life.

Third reply: It is also possible that one, who was to live more, used his freedom badly and committed evil deeds like cruelty with relatives or false witnessing etc., thereby inviting a cut in his destined age. Likewise, it is also possible that one who got a sixty-year life earned that extension because of good deeds which cause a longer lifespan. Imam Sadiq (a.s.) is responded to have said: "Those who die due to sins are more than those who die because of destined death. Likewise those who live because of good deeds are more than those who live due to destined life."16

On Judgment Day, all realities would become evident and then there will be no scope for such questions.

Question 14

Q.14: After being driven out how did Satan enter Paradise and misguide Adam? If he could enter Paradise, he was not accursed and if he entered in the form of a snake or through any other trick, then God did not drive him away.

A: The garden wherein Adam and Hawwa stayed and where Satan misguided Adam was not the everlasting Paradise (Jannat-e- Khuld), which is promised to the obedient servants of God. So it is useless to ask how the devil entered it. Shaykh Kulaini and Shaykh Sadooq have narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) that the garden in which Adam and Hawwa lived was a garden of this world where sun and moon rose and set. Had it been the Paradise of the Hereafter or had it been the promised Paradise, Adam would not have been driven out of it.

As regards what is said about the arrival of Satan in the form of serpent or in the mouth of a snake, it is incorrect and such rumors are worth less although some have considered them allegorical. For more detail s refer to Tafsir al-Mizan

Question 15

Q.15: ls the present Satan the very first original Satan or he has progeny and descendents? If he has, why God created other satans from the one which was already condemned?

A: Yes, Satan is the same original Satan who is named Iblis and who is to survive till Judgment Day.

قَالَ فَإِنَّكَ مِنَ الْمُنْظَرِينَ

إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْوَقْتِ الْمَعْلُومِ

“ He said: So surely you are of the respited ones. Till the period of the time made known.” (Al Hijr, 15:37-38)

Also he has very many children and progeny as mentioned in the Holy Quran:

أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ أَوْلِيَاءَ

"...would you then take him and his offspring for friends ...” (Al Kahf, 1 8:49)

And He also says:

إِنَّهُ يَرَاكُمْ هُوَ وَقَبِيلُهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا تَرَوْنَهُمْ ۗ

"...he surely sees you, he as well as his host from whence you cannot see them ...” (Al- A’raaf 7:27)

As for the reason of creation of satans and infidels, it is the goodness of creation and imminent invention. On the contrary to refrain from it is stopping of grace and hence undesirable in every condition. What is ready and worthy of coming into existence, Allah would bring it into existence. But the wicked aspects, which arise from some creations like satans and infidels is due to their wrongful choice and, therefore, the condemnation is related to them and not to their Creator.

In other words He created satans and infidels and gave them freedom of choice and also made them responsible, informing them of the things, which would benefit them, but they disobeyed Him and made themselves deprived of good and became sources of mischieves. Thus, whatever is from Allah is all good and nice and whatever is condemnable is from the creatures themselves.

If it is said: What is the wisdom of accepting this origin and what is the benefit in creation of satans? We may reply: One of the wisdoms behind it, is the coming out of some righteous and faithful persons from their progeny like Haam bin Heern. It is obvious that even if only one true believer is born, it is enough to achieve the aim of creation.

It is mentioned in Al-Kafi that if not more than one single believer person is there on the earth, it is sufficient. One of the wisdoms behind the creation of satans is the huge benefit which the believers get by not paying attention to deceptions and doubts raised by them. First ly: satans are means, through which you can differentiate between a righteous and a corrupt character. It is said:

وَمَا كَانَ لَهُ عَلَيْهِمْ مِنْ سُلْطَانٍ إِلَّا لِنَعْلَمَ مَنْ يُؤْمِنُ بِالْآخِرَةِ مِمَّنْ هُوَ مِنْهَا فِي شَكٍّ

"And he has no authority over them, but that We may distinguish him who. believes in the hereafter from him who is in doubt concerning it..." (As-Saba, 34:21)

Secondly, deceptions of satans cause the believer to earn divine grace and salvation if he opposes them. On the contrary, such a person attains a rank higher than that of angels.

Question 16

Q.16: Kindly explain the difference between the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mahfooz) and the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) and also between destiny (Taqdeer) and free will (Tadbeer). Are supplications and devotions effective in destined matters?

A: Scholars have made deep studies in the matter of the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Ma/ooz) and the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat). One of them, Allamah Tabarsi (a.r.) says in Sharhe Usul Kafi: Verses of Quran and traditions prove that the Almighty Allah has created two tablets and recorded in them whatever takes place.

The first is the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mafooz) wherein there is no change under any circumstances and it is according to the knowledge of the Almighty Allah. Another tablet is the Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) wherein He records one thing and then erases it through many exigencies and strategies which are not concealed from the wise.

For example, He records in it the age of Zaid as 50 years, that is, it is according to strategy that he should live for fifty years, provided he does not do anything which increases or decreases one's lifespan. Then if he behaves nicely with his relatives, Allah erases '50' and writes '60' and if he disregards the rights of his blood relatives '50' is turned to '40'. But in the Protected Tablet (Lauhe Mahfooz) it is mentioned what has to happen. For instance, if Zaid or Hasan behaves nicely with his relatives, which cause increase in lifespan, from the very beginning, what is recorded in lauhe Mahfooz is 60. And he willfully behaves badly with relatives, the figure of 40 is there already fixed in lauhe Mahfooz.

Summarily speaking, there never occurs any change in Lauhe Mahfooz; on the contrary what is going to happen, is from the very beginning recorded in it. Of course, changes are possible in lauhe Mahwo Athhaat question, which is called as modified destiny (Bada) (This was discussed in the related question).

If it is asked what is the use of Tablet of erasing and writing (Lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) if whatever is to happen, is already recorded in Protected Tablet (lauhe Mahfooz)?

We reply: There are many things of wisdom. Allamah Majlisi has written some of them incling the one that there are angels who write the tablets. Those who come to know about that tablet by the Grace of Almighty Allah Lord concerning His servant after the Messengers and Imams know about them, they inform God 's servants about the same saying that your good deeds have such effects and also that their misdeeds also can cause harm to you. Certainly such information make the believers attend good deeds and refrain from bad ones.

Among the deeds which can change the things destined in Tablet of erasing and writing (lauhe Mahwo Athbaat) are charities and supplications. That is why much emphasis is put on these two things in related traditions and verses. Here we suffice with only one tradition of Al- Kaji under the Chapter of supplication wards off calamities and death".

It is narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) that he said:

"Verily supplication erases destiny and breaks it into pieces just as a rope is broken into pieces after it was wound tightly."17

It means that a thing which had been firmly fixed in destiny is erased through supplication, just as in the case of the people of Prophet Yunus (a.s.) a calamity which had came very near to them was deferred due to the earnest prayers and collective supplications offered sincerely by that community.

Notes

1. Usul Kafi , Vol. 2 , Pg. 452; Biharul Anwar, Vol. 73, Pg. 387

2. Usul Kafi, Vol.1 pg.160, Tr.13

3. Nahjul Balagha, Subhi Salih, Saying no. 250, Pg. 511

4. Mafatihul Jinan, Post Prayer Recitation of Asr Prayer

5. Further details about the ‘weak’ are given in reply to question 34 which may be referred to

6. Further details about the 'weak ' are given in reply to question 34 which may be referred to.

7. Usul Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 93-94

8. Usul Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 97

9. Initial stage of creation; in which human beings existed only as spirits. (Aalam=world, Zar=particle)

10. Mafatihul Jinan, Dua Nudbah

11. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 78, Pg 83

12. Al-Kafi, Vol. I , Pg. l 46 [Allah is not worshipped as much as He is worshipped through the beli ef i n Bada ] J n the same source it is mentioned that the Al mighty A llah is not exalted by anything as much as He is exalted through belief in Boda.

And in Biharul Anwar, Vol. 27, Pg. 286 i t is narrated from Imam Muham mad Baq ir (a.s.) that he said: A11ah did not send any prophet except that he made the people swear to three points: Belief in Allah, in His oneness and belief that He post pones and advances whatever He likes.

13. Al- Kafi. Vol. I, Pg. 148

14. Al-Kafi, Vol. 3, Pg. 354

15. Biharul Anwar. Vol. 84, Pg. 264

16. Biharul Anwar , Vo l. 83, Pg. 354

17. Al- Kafi , Vol. 4, Pg. 2 15

Prophethood

Question 17: "I witness that you were lights in the sublime loins…."

"I witness that you were lights in the sublime loins…."1

Q. 17: Were all ancestors of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) monotheists. Did they follow the religion of Prophet Musa and Isa (a.s.) during their respective periods? If it is so, then His Eminence, Abdul Muttalib ought to have been a Christian. If Abdul Muttalib and Abu Talib were on the religion of their ancestor, Ibrahim (a.s.), what prevented them from accepting the religions of Musa and Isa (a.s.)? It is said that Hamza, the Chief of Martyrs was formerly a polythe ist and that he accepted Islam afterwards and earned the attention of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.). Is it correct?

A: One of the agreed matters according to the true creed of the Imamites is that all ancestors of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) right upto the father of mankind, His Eminence, Adam were monotheists.

Allamah Majlisi, in Chapter 3, Volume 2 of Hayatul Qulub says: Imamite scholars are unanimous that the parents of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and their grandparents right up to His Eminence, Adam (a.s.) were believers and the effulgence of his holiness never settled in the loin or womb of any polytheist and there never has been any doubt in the matter of the genealogy of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and his male and female ancestors. There are traditions (both Sunni and Shia) to prove this.

On the contrary successive traditions show that all ancestors of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) had been messengers and Imams, and carriers of Religion of God (lslam). The descendants of Ismail (a.s.) who were ancestors of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) were legatees of Prophet Ibrahim (a.s.) and the rulership of Mecca and guardianship of Holy Kaaba and its construction etc. had always rested with them and they were the point of reference whom people approached for guidance. The nationality of Ibrahim (a.s.) had always been in them.

And when the Shariat of His Eminence, Musa and His Eminence, Isa was there, the Shariat of Ibrahim had not been cancelled for the children of Ismail. They were the protectors of that Shariat and willed one another about it and had been handing over the heirloom of messengership to one after another until they made Abdul Muttalib and Abu Talib their legatees and Abu Talib handed over these things to the last prophet, His Eminence, Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) when he was raised by Allah as His final messenger.

Also in Chapter 13 of the same book, it is mentioned that the legatees of His Eminence, Ibrahim and Ismail (a.s.) are the descendants of Ismail and his legatees ended at His Eminence, Abdul Muttalib and then after him to Abu Talib and the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.), because, as mentioned in some narrations, the legatees of Ibrahim were in two branches: one the descendants of Ishaq among whom are the prophets of Bani Israel and second the sons of Ismail among whom were grandfathers of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and they were on the faith of His Eminence, Ibrahim and had protected his Shariat and the prophets of Bani Israel were not raised from them.

Statements of Allamah Majlisi clarify that His Eminences, Abdul Muttalib and Abu Talib were not bound to follow the religious law of Musa and Isa (a.s.) as they themselves were the legatees of His Eminence, Ibrahim (a.s.) and divine proofs. Thus it is written in Volume 6 of Biharul Anwar that Imam Sadiq (a.s.) said: The Almighty Allah will raise Abdul Muttalib on Judgment Day, having the appearance of messengers and the pomp of kings.2

It is mentioned in Ittiqadaat of Shaykh Sadooq (r.a.) that:

"And it is related that Abdu l Muttalib was a Proof (Hujjat) and Abu Talib was a Successor (Wasi)."3

As for His Eminence, Hamza, uncle of the Prophet, the cause of his conversion to Islam is explained in detail in Elaamul Waraa of Tabarsi It also shows how high his sacrifice was in the path of mono heism and in support of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.).

Question 18

Q.18: Apparently verses 90, 91 and 924 of Surah Bani Israel show that people asked for a miracle from the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and he did not comply with that demand. Opponents present them to prove that he did not possess miracles. Please reply to this objection and also narrate the circumstances of revelation of these verses.

A: Logically it is necessary that one who claims to be a messenger of God (and if he has the virtues for messengership mentioned elsewhere earlier) to have a miracle. It means that he must have something, which is extraordinary so that it may prove the veracity of his claim. It is so, because if he is a false claimant, Allah would never allow him to do anything extraordinary or unusual. Of course, only one miracle is sufficient for the confinnation of this high post. It is against logic to say that he should bring miracles demanded by everyone. Rather such compliance is undesirable, because if he brings about whatever everyone asks for, it would disrupt the management of this universe and upset the maintenance of the affair of this world which the Almighty Allah has made, according to His strategies, dependent upon causes and reasons. In other words, the prophets were not raised to disrupt the organization of the universe, they were raised to cleanse hearts and to call the people to the Lord Creator.

We may also say that most probabl y those who demanded such silly things never wanted to put faith in truth. On the contrary they only needed material benefits or intended to mock the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.). In such circumstances, complying with their demands would have been illogical and against wisdom.

We also say that sometimes they may ask for a thing, which is illogical and it is obvious that the illogical is prohibited. And a miracle is to be against the ordinary, and never against logic.

After this preamble, we can say that the polytheists who demanded miracle from the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) had in fact asked for extraordinary things as mentioned in these verses.

Firstly, their demand was never to get confirmation or proof of the Prophet's messengership in order to bring faith, because they had always been bent on harming the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) even after observing hundreds of splendid signs. Such manifestation did not increase in them anything but hatred.

Had they really wanted to know the truth, only one miracle would have sufficed; especially the miraculous Quran. Even after seeing the miracle of the splitting of moon, they said: This is magic. Summarily, their aim after demanding such miracles was never to believe and to put faith in the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.). They only intended to mock him and hence such demands were not worth paying attention to.

Secondly, some of their demands were absurd and against logic, which included seeing Almighty Allah and angels; that is, they said: We will not believe in what you say, until you make us see Allah and His angels with our eyes:

أَوْ تَأْتِيَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةِ قَبِيلًا

"...or bring Allah and the angels face to face (with us). "(Al-Israa, 17:92)

And since, seeing Almighty Allah is impossible because He is not a body and is free from physicality, He says in reply:

قُلْ سُبْحَانَ رَبِّي

"Say: Glory be to my Lord ...” (Al-Israa, 17:93)

Some of their demands were against divine wisdom in the affairs of the universe and creation. They said: We will not believe you unless you lift up the mountains of Mecca and make the ground plain and make streams to flow, which should never dry up:

وَقَالُوا لَنْ نُؤْمِنَ لَكَ حَتَّىٰ تَفْجُرَ لَنَا مِنَ الْأَرْضِ يَنْبُوعًا

"And they say: We will by no means believe in you until you cause a fountain to gush forth from the earth for us…” (Al-lsraa, 17:90)

Some of their demands were childish, based on ignorance and seeking excuse and quarrels, which were based on their enmity, grudge and obstinacy. They said:

رًاأَوْ تَكُونَ لَكَ جَنَّةٌ مِنْ نَخِيلٍ وَعِنَبٍ فَتُفَجِّرَ الْأَنْهَارَ خِلَالَهَا تَفْجِي

"Or you should have a garden of palms and grapes in the midst of which you should cause rivers to flow forth, gushing out."(Al-Isra, 17:91)

أَوْ تُسْقِطَ السَّمَاءَ كَمَا زَعَمْتَ عَلَيْنَا كِسَفً

"Or you should cause the heaven to come down upon us in pieces as you think ..." (Al-Israa, 17:92)

أَوْ يَكُونَ لَكَ بَيْتٌ مِنْ زُخْرُفٍ

"Or you should have a house of gold ...” (Al-lsraa, 17:93)

أَوْ يَكُونَ لَكَ بَيْتٌ مِنْ زُخْرُفٍ

"...or you should ascend into heaven, and we will not believe in your ascending until you bring down to us a book which we may read.” (Al-Israa, 17:93)

It is not hidden from any sensible person that none of these demands are logical and worth being attended to, especially in view of their enmity, hatred and obstinacy.

Thirdly, we say that one of the reasons for not meeting such foolish demands is that it has always been full of hidden wisdom of Almighty Allah that whenever a community demanded an extraordinary miracle and when He also showed it to them and when even thereafter they did not put faith in the messenger, they were destroyed in an instant punishment.

The people of Prophet Salih (a.s.) demanded that a special kind of she-camel should come out of the mountain; but even after seeing the desired miracle they did not believe in His prophethood, on the contrary their hatred and enmity doubled; then the Almighty Allah destroyed all of them.

No doubt the polytheists of Mecca also were like people of Salih (a.s.) and that even after seeing what they had demanded they were certainly not going to believe in what the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said and their hatred would have multiplied and they would also have been destroyed. God's strategy did not call for their total destruction, especially from the aspect that most of their descendants were to become Muslims. There is a hint in this verse about this demand:

وَمَا مَنَعَنَا أَنْ نُرْسِلَ بِالْآيَاتِ إِلَّا أَنْ كَذَّبَ بِهَا الْأَوَّلُونَ

"And nothing could have hindered Us that We should send signs except that the ancients rejected them..." (Al-Israa, 17:59)

Meaning: Nothing prevented us from acceding to the improvised demands of the Quraish, but the fact that the people before them had made such demands and We had shown the same to them through Our Messengers. But they rejected them, gave them a lie and then We annihilated them. If We bring about what they are demanding by way of miracles, We know that they would not believe.Then chastisement must be sent down on them. But from the begi nning We have decided that We wou ld not annihilate them because of the nobility of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) or due to the fact that We would bring out true believers from their progeny.

Or the meaning of the holy verse is that We do not send improvised signs as We do know that they would not believe. So such sending of signs would be useless.

It is clear from the above explanation that the argument of deniers is wrong, whereby they say that according to the verse the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) did not possess miracles. The fact is that the Holy Quran repeatedly asserts that messengers of Allah did have miracles:

لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلَنَا بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ

"Certainly We sent Our apostles with clear arguments..." (Al- Had id, 57:25)

On the contrary, it even provides details of some such miracles. How can they say that the Last Prophet did not have miracles? Almighty Allah Himself has described the Holy Quran as His miracle and also challenges that even if all jinns and men join together, they would not be able to bring even a single chapter like that of the Holy Quran.

There also are many continuous narrations mentioning several other miracles shown by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.). Some of them are mentioned in the Holy Quran. Now then do the opponents dare say that the Holy Quran denies the miracles by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.)? For example, here are brief descriptions of some miracles of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) in Quran:

I - One of the miracles of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) is ascension to the heavens (Meraj) wherein Allah raised the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) one night from Mecca to Masjid Aqsa and from there to heavens. He says in the beginning of Surah Bani Israel :

سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي أَسْرَىٰ بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلًا مِنَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ ىالْأَقْصَ

"Glory be to Him Who made His servant to go on a night from the Sacred Mosque to the remote mosque ..." (Al- Israa, 17:1)

And the end of ascension is described in Surah Najm.5

2- Another miracle is splitting of the Moon, which was demanded by the polytheists of Mecca who said: As magic is not effective in the sky, if you show us the splitting of moon, we would believe in your messengership. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) hinted at the moon with his holy finger whereby the moon split into two and thereafter he again pointed his finger to it and it rejoined. So it is mentioned in Surah Qamar:

اقْتَرَبَتِ السَّاعَةُ وَانْشَقَّ الْقَمَرُ

"The hour drew nigh and the moon did rend asunder. (Al-Qamar, 54: 1)

3- Yet another miracle of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) is h is throwing a handful of sand on the army of infidels whereby Allah made it to hit the eyes and noses of the entire army of deniers in such a way that they were totally defeated in that war between truth and falsehood. It is mentioned in Surah Anfal:

وَمَا رَمَيْتَ إِذْ رَمَيْتَ وَلَٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ رَمَىٰ

"...and you did not smite when you smote (the enemy), but it was Allah Who smote ..." (Al- An fal, ( 8:17)

4- One more of the miracles of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) was blowing of a hard wind during the Battle of Ahzab. The Almighty Allah made that wind so severe and cold that it uprooted their tents and extinguished their fires and made them unable to stay there, so they were compelled to flee. Almighty Allah also sent a number of angels to assist the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.). It is mentioned in Surah Ahzab that:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اذْكُرُوا نِعْمَةَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذْ جَاءَتْكُمْ جُنُودٌ فَأَرْسَلْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ رِيحًا وَجُنُودًا لَمْ تَرَوْهَا ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرًا

"O you who believe! Call to mind the favor of Allah to you when there came down upon you hosts, so We sent against them a strong wind and hosts, that you saw not...” (Al- Ahzab, 33:9)

So also, in the Battle of Hunain, when the Muslim army was defeated and took to flight, Almighty Allah sent some angels to help the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.). He gave peace of mind to believers and defeated and overpowered the deniers. It is mentioned in Surah Baraat:

وَيَوْمَ حُنَيْنٍ لَقَدْ نَصَرَكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي مَوَاطِنَ كَثِيرَةٍ ۙ

"Certainly Allah helped you in many battlefields and on the day of (battle of) Hunain...” (At-Taubah, 9:25)

5- Also among the miracles granted to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and mentioned in Quran, is giving advance information of unknown events which proved true afterwards. There are many such miracles, but we mention only some of them here. Their details are available in books of Quranic exegesis. For example the holy verse:

سَيُهْزَمُ الْجَمْعُ وَيُوَلُّونَ الدُّبُرَ

"Soon shall the hosts be routed, and they shall turn (their) backs. " (Al-Qamar, 54:45)

. .which predicted the defeat and flight of the denier army and which was proved true during the Battle of Badr. It is mentioned:

سَأُلْقِي فِي قُلُوبِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا الرُّعْبَ فَاضْرِبُوا فَوْقَ الْأَعْنَاقِ

"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads ..” (Al-Anfal, 8:12)

Then He predicted the victory of Khyber and so also of the conquests, all of which proved totally true. Accordingly, it is mentioned in Surah Fath:

وَعَدَكُمُ اللَّهُ مَغَانِمَ كَثِيرَةً

"Allah promised you many acquisitions...” (Al-Fath, 48:20)

Also in Surah Kauthar the prediction of continuation of progeny of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and discontinuation of progeny of his taunters is given and so did it happen. The late scholar, Fakhrul Islam, (r.a.), in his Bayanul Haqq (Vol. 1), has quoted thirty instances of such prophecies given in the Holy Quran and twenty prophecies of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) about things known to none except Almigh ty Allah and mentioned in the Holy

Quran (desirous readers may refer to this book). Allamah Majlisi (r.a.) in Vol. 2 of Hayatul Qulub has also collected a number of such news items, which can be seen by those who want to.

It is mentioned in Volume 2 of Aneesul Aalaam (Pg. 245) that there are eight instances of such advance news in the Gospels. It is mentioned therein that His Eminence, Isa Masih (a.s.) was asked to produce some improvised signs and His Eminence, did not pay attention to those demands. One of such instances quoted in the said book is verse II , chapter 8 in the Book of Marks:

The Farisis came out and began to argue with him (His Eminence, Masih) and as a trial they asked him to produce miracles from the sky and he sighed from his heart saying: For what this group is asking such signs? I have already told you that no sign will be shown to this group.

Question 19

Q.19: What is the difference between the terms: Zanb (sin), lthm (transgression), lsyaan (disobedience) and Tarke Oolaa (leaving a preferable option)?

The Holy Quran talks clearly about Zanb (sin) of prophets. How can it mean Tarke Oolaa (leaving a preferable option)? How is immunity from sin (lsmah) proved?

A: Zanb, lthm and Isyaan are different words meaning one thing, which is going against divine command to do something or to refrain from a thing that Allah has ordered. Again order and prohibition are of two types. It is either absolutely obligatory and what is opposite to it should never be done. In other words, it is liked by Lord Almighty and hence not complying with it, results in divine anger. For example, the order to perform ritual prayer, fasting, paying of Zakat etc. Carrying out these commands pleases God and not complying with them invites God's wrath and displeasure; likewise are examples of prohibitions.

The second kind is without any threat. In other words, it is desired and liked by God, yet not doing it does not earn His anger and chastisement. Such commands and prohibitions are called recommended and detestable respectively. It means that a recommended act is one doing which is better and that it is better not to leave it. Yet there is no punishment for leaving it. That which is against the position of prophet's infallibility is the first kind: That is to leave compulsory deeds and to indulge in prohibited things.

But to give up recommended deeds and to commit that which is detestable (better not done) does not go against the position of messengers. Since plain logic demands that messengers of Allah must always be immune from every big and small sin, the word used in the Holy Quran that is, 'Zanb' must mean a deed of the second sort.

As regards the way of proving the infallibility of prophets and Imams, Allamah Hilli 's Sharhe Gufta Muhaqqiq Tusi, says that infallibility is a secret known to nobody (as it is a power of the soul and might of Almighty Allah, it is impossible for one who has it to ever disobey Allah). It can be proved in two ways:

First is a clear statement of the prophet or Imam and such clear texts prove the matter. Of course, the concerned person in question must have the qualities of such infallibility.

Second is appointment by Almighty Allah, Who shows miracles through that holy person. Such show of miracles testifies that Allah made him His prophet. Otherwise He would have never allowed such extraordinary event to take place through him. Since showing miracles by a man is proof of Allah's attestation to that person 's prophethood or Imamate, he must always have the virtue of infallibility, which is an essential condition.

"Logically effect is the proof of the cause. Accordingly, existence of effect proves existence of cause. The mention of the messenger in the Holy Quran testifies that they are divinely appointed messengers. Hence their infallibility too is also proved and agreed. Therefore whatever fault of theirs is mentioned therein must be of the second kind: either omitting the recommended or committing the detestable.

Question 20

Q.20: ls it essential to believe that ascension (Meraj) of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) was physical. On the night of ascension, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) had seen people being chastised, though Judgment Day has not yet arrived. What was the nature of Prophet's observance?

A: Yes, it is an essential principle of Islamic belief and proved by the text of the Holy Quran that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) traveled during the night of ascension from Masjidul Haraam to Masjidul Aqsa. Allah says in the beginning of Surah Ban Israel:

سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي أَسْرَىٰ بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلًا مِنَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ الْأَقْصَى

"Glory be to Him Who made His servant to go on a night from the Sacred Mosque to tlie remote mosque ..." (Al- Isra, 17: 1)

Then from Masjidul Aqsa he traveled to the heavens as mentioned in narrations.

It is also mentioned in Surah Najm and commentaries of the same. Thus belief in ascension of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) on the night of ascension is an essential article of religious belief. Scenes shown by Allah to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) were scenes of events which are to take place in the world of Purgatory (Barzakh) and in Judgment Day (Qiyamat) with regard to people who would earn either reward or punishment. Even though it is supposed to happen in future, it was shown to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) in advance.

Question 21

اقْتَرَبَتِ السَّاعَةُ وَانْشَقَّ الْقَمَرُ

"The hour drew nigh and the moon did rend asunder. " (Al- Qamar, 54: l)

Q.21: Healthy logic and intelligence accepts that when the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) pointed to the moon, it split into two and thereafter at his order the two parts rejoined. But it is mentioned in Sunnah that one of the pieces entered the right sleeve of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and the other half in the left. This latter part of the saying seems to be against logic just as the saying that the world is contained in the skin of an egg.

Please let us know if this latter part is mentioned in reliable traditions: If so what is the reply to this question?

A: What is agreed by all in the matter of the Prophet's miracle called splitting of the Moon (Shaqqul Qamar) is that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) had pointed to the moon and split it into two. The two parts remained separate for some time and when the Prophet once again gestured, they joined and returned to the previous state. Upto this is, there is no doubt in what has been mentioned in Quran and in consecutive traditions. It is also not correct to say that breaking and joining of heavenly bodies in the sky is impossible. Recent research in space sciences has revealed that the globe of moon is, like globe of earth and amenable to breaking and joining and there is no difference as such in these two celestial bodies.

As for the subject of coming of the moon to earth and going of it into the sleeve of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.), I have not found any such thing in Quranic commentaries and books of religious scholars. This is mentioned only in Nasikhut Tawarikh; and that too without quoting the source. There is no doubt that it is not only unacceptable but also illogical; unless it is explained properly and until the true meaning of this statement is brought forth.

Question 22

وَهَمَّ بِهَا لَوْلَا أَنْ رَأَىٰ بُرْهَانَ رَبِّهِ وَلَقَدْ هَمَّتْ بِهِ

"And certainly she made for him, and he would have made for her, were it not that he had seen the manifest evidence of his Lord ..." ( Yusuf, 1 2:24)

Q.22: Mamun asked Imam Ridha’ (a.s.): 'How can Prophet Yusuf (a.s.) indulge with Zulaikha when he is a prophet and infallible?' What was the reply of Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) which satisfied the latter?

A: In Uyun Akhbar Ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) it is narrated that: Mamun said: O son of the Prophet of God, how excellent! Let me know about the meaning of what the Almighty Allah said:

"And certainly she made for him, and he would have made for her, were it not that he had seen the manifest evidence of his Lord ..."

Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) said: ·she tried to seduce Yusuf (a.s.). Were it not that he had seen the manifest evidence of his Lord, he would have done to her just as what she had done to him. However, Yusuf (a.s.) was immaculate, and the immaculate neither commits sins nor think of committing them. Indeed my father, Imam Ja'far Sadiq (a.s.) told me that she intended to do it, but he decided not to."6

The gist of the reply of Imam Ali Ridha’ (a.s.) is that the phrase: "were it not that he had seen the manifest evidence of his Lord" is the condition for "and he would have made for her” hence the meaning of this holy verse becomes:

Had Yusuf (a.s.) not seen the proof of his Lord, he would have certainly inclined toward Zulaikha. Since "were it not that he had seen the manifest evidence of his Lord" is for rejection of the second sentence through the existence of the first the meaning becomes:

As Yusuf saw the proof of his Lord, he did not incline toward Zulaikha. For explanation of His Lord's proof (Burhane Rabbih), His Eminence, Ali bin Husain (a.s.) is reported to have said that :

Zulaikha threw her dress on the idol in her apartment, saying: I feel ashamed of it (the idol). Prophet Yusuf (a.s.) remarked: When you feel thus ashamed in front of an idol, which neither sees nor hear; why should I not feel ashamed before my God, Who has created man and Who knows each and everything about him?

Question 23

إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ شَاهِدًا وَمُبَشِّرًا وَنَذِيرًا

“Surely We have sent you as a witness and as a bearer of good news and as a warner.” (Al-Fath, 48:8)

Q.23: Kindly explain the difference between giver of glad tidings (Basheer) and warner (Nazeer).

A: Basheer means one who gives good tidings anct Nazeer means one who frightens with warnings. The reason for calling the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) by these two adjectives is that his honor gave glad tidings of Paradise to the believers and warned the infidels of a fearful hellfire. He is the giver of good news of the ranks to the obedient and of stages of Hell to the disobedient and sinners. He is also a giver of good news to sinners that their repentance will be accepted by the Merciful God. At the same time he is also a warner for those worshippers, who make a show and are proud of their worship as such attitude nullifies their deeds.

Question 24

Q.24: Please explain the difference between miracle, magic and jugglery.

A: A miracle is manifested by Allah through His Messenger, which is against the normal course in such a way that all cannot present such a thing in spite of all their knowledge and power. A miracle is thus a proof of truthfulness of one who claims to be a messenger of God, Who never allows a miracle to be performed by an imposter of messengership or prophethood as it is against perfect wisdom of Almighty Allah, because it is apparently awkward that a liar should be able to show miracles and Allah can never indulge in an awkward thing.

As for the definition of magic: Sorcery or magic is manifestation of a thing against the ordinary by a person who is impure and evil with the help or means of some special acts.

Those acts are such, which anyone can learn by heart and bring about results. Thus difference between miracle and magic was such as:

First: Miracle is from Allah, the Merciful for testifying His messenger's truthfulness; whereas sorcery is from Satan. It is an effect of the filth of the magician and his engagement with devils and their indulgence in unclean deeds or acts, which make them nearer to satans. The difference between miracle and sorcery is seen from the difference between Mercifulness and mischievousness.

Second: If an extraordinary thing is seen or manifested with the hands of a person who has no faults or evils in him at all and he is also having all desirable virtues and is not selfish at all regarding any material thing and his total concern is with Almighty Allah, all this shows that the unusual thing he has shown is indeed a miracle and that it is granted to him by Almighty Allah as a miracle and that he is true in his claim to be a messenger or Imam.

On the other hand, if there is a fellow who shows extraordinary and unusual things, but who is mean-minded, desirous of worldly things and worshipper of his desires and devoid of all graceful virtues, then what he has shown is of course magic and he himself is accursed. Most probably every aspect of his mean-mindedness and evil intentions will not remain hidden from intelligent people. This is how miracle and magic can be distinguished by wise people.

Intelligent people, on seeing unusual and unhabitual things in someone do not put faith in him at once until they have looked deeply into that person 's conditions and ascertain whether what he has shown is spiritual and divine or material and satanic. When they find that he is clean and pious and is not interested in anything except the pleasure of God and that he is always engaged in worship and has perfect virtues and is clean of every evil thing then they obey him fully and love him from heart and put themselves in his service.

On the other hand, if they find that a fellow is selfish and mad after money and material things and seeks only worldly ranks and his deeds are undesirable, then they become sure that he has shown only magic and sorcery. If such a selfish fellow claims to be a prophet or spiritual leadership, the wise people at once become sure that he is a liar and a perjurer and hence will reject his claim even if he shows thousands of unusual things and astonishing and wonderful matters. Intelligent and wise people understand that whatever unusual things such an imposter has shown are the result of some hidden causes which rnay be exposed by those who have any knowledge of such matters.

The third difference between miracle and sorcery is that miracle does not require any ritual or trouble-taking and whatever the messenger or prophet asks comes up by the Command of God. On the other hand a magician or a sorcerer needs to do perform acts acquiring some

materials, spells, charms, amulets and materials like stones or roots and control of jinns and satans and some eatables, which disrupt human mind and change feelings. Hence it is often noticed that magicians make people drink tea or coffee to affect their perceptions and make them see astonishing things. They also indulge in hidden handiworks for gathering riches.

That is why some scholars have said that it is also necessary to gain knowledge of sorcery (at least for some people) so that masses may be warned of their tricks and they may be protected from their webs, nets, traps etc. It should also be known that sometimes a magician may show wonders without resorting to special acts and may show his will power acquired by exercises (which are false and rejected). But in such event, if he claims to be a prophet, Almighty Allah, Who is merciful and kind will certainly expose that fellow's falsehood or He will not allow what that fellows wants to bring out and raise some certain events, which will expose that fellow's falsehood.

Fourth: Miracle is not bound by time and space. Time and space cannot hinder the messenger and he will seek from the Almighty Allah anything at anytime and at any place whereby the extraordinary and wonderful event will come up at once before all. And also what the Messenger of Allah will show will be according to what people had demanded. For example, if people say: Please make a man who died a hundred years ago rise from his grave so that we may believe in your prophethood; then as soon as the messengers requests Allah, that dead person will rise up unless it is known that what people demanded was not for putting faith, but only to seek excuse as mentioned in reply to another question.

But magic is bound by time and space. The magician cannot do whatever he wants at once. In magic it is what the magician wants to show, not what people ask of him. In case there is a fellow who acquires will power to bring forth what others demand then we say that if such person claims divine messengership, Almighty Allah, Who is wise and kind to His creation, will certainly not allow such a thing to happen, which may misguide the masses.

Question 25

Q.25: Please differentiate between logically impossible (Mahaale Aqli) and seemingly impossible (Ghair Aqli).

A: Logically impossible (Mahaale Aqli) is something the occurrence of which seems improbable to reason or logic; in other words which is impossible by itself; for example having controversies such as associating anything or anyone with Allah, which is absolutely ruled out by reason and common sense does not admit its happening or for example the statement that the universe is contained in the shell of an egg (unless the world becomes small and the egg large). Obviously such matters are logically impossible.

As for the commonly impossible; they are things which can happen by themselves, that is, logic or reason does not rule out its possibility; but which are not likely to happen in the normal course. They include conception of a fetus without a father as in case of Isa (a.s.).

Miracles shown by all divine messengers are also as such. They are against ordinary but not against logic. For example: speaking and movement of animals, trees and stones etc; so also curing of born blinds without medicine and even ma k ing the dead alive. All these are abnormal phenomena, but the Almighty Allah makes them possible through the hands of His Messengers for verification of their prophethood or Imamate. None of such events are against logic and reason does not rule out their occurrence.

Notes

1. Mafatihul Jinan, Ziyarat Imam Husain (a.s.), on Eidul Fitr and Eidul Adha (Qurban).

2. Biharul Anwar , Vol. 35. Pg. I 56

3. Shiite Creed, Shaykh Saduq, Pg. 85, Chapter 40

4. And they say: We will by no mean..; believe in you until you cause a fountain to gush forth from the earth for us. Or you should have a garden of palms and grapes in the midst of which you should cause rivers to flow forth, gushing out. Or you should cause the heaven to come down upon us in pieces as you think, or bring Allah and the angels face to face (with us).

5. The explanation of Surah Najm with details of Ascension (Meraj}) has

been discussed by Ayatullah Dastghaib in a separate book.

6. Uyun Akhbar ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), Vol. l , Pg. 20 l

Imamate

"Of Whomsoever I am the master this Ali is also his master. "1

Question 26

Q.26: Please describe the various meanings of the Arabic word of Maula (Master).

A: According to Arabic language, Maula has sixteen meanings:

(1) Owner/master (2) Lord (3) liberator (4) liberated (5) neighbor (6) ahead and behind (7) ruled (8) guarantor with whom agreement has been made (9) son-in-law (10) cousin (11) benefactor (12) who has benefited (13) friend (14) helper (15) obeyed one or superior leader and (16) one who is preferable.

When a word having various meanings, like this word (Maula) is used in a sentence, in order to arrive at its proper meaning one must look at the verbal or logical context. So we say: Look at the tradition of Ghadeer Khum which is successively narrated (Mutawatir) that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said:

"This Ali is the master for whomsoever I am the master."

Doubtlessly, in this tradition, the first twelve meanings mentioned above do not fit as they are unrelated with the matter on the contrary most of them are false and incorrect. The thirteenth and the fourteenth meaning; which is helper or friend too, has nothing related to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and His Eminence, Ali. They equally and commonly apply to all faithfuls, that is, every believer is the friend of every faithful as is mentioned in the following verse:

وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتُ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَاءُ بَعْضٍ

"And (as for) the believing men and the believing women, they are guardians of each other ...” ( At-Taubah, 9:71)

Rather even angels are friends of the faithful and also their helpers as mentioned in the verse:

نَحْنُ أَوْلِيَاؤُكُمْ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَفِي الْآخِرَةِ

"We are your guardians in this world's life and in the hereafter ..." (Al Fussilat, 4 1:31)

Thirdly, the context definitely, logically and verbally shows that what is meant is the sixteenth meaning and that the fifteenth and the sixteenth meanings are nearer to one another. The verbal context too shows that Maula means one who must be given first preference in following as the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) before making this statement, asked:

"Am I not more preferable for you than your own lives?'' Thereafter he said: "For the one whom I am preferable to his l ife so is Al i for him in all affairs."

Thus it is only the sixteenth meaning which fits the occasion. Moreover, any other meaning is improper from the viewpoint of Arabic language and grammar as agreed by linguists.

The second thing which supports this meaning is the statement of Umar, who said:

"Congratulations to you, o son of Abu Talib!"

Ibne Athir also has written that what Umar meant was that Ali has been given the position of preference in obedience over all.

The third support to this meaning is what the Arab poet Hassan bin Thabit composed in Ghadeer Khum and which is equally popular among Shias and Sunnis; He recited:

"Then he (the Prophet) said to him: Stand up O Ali, indeed I am pleased of you being the Imam and guide after me."

This clearly shows that what Hassan, who was present in Ghadeer, meant was only the one who is to be given preference in obedience; that is Imamate.

Fourth proof: Prophet's words:

"You are the Imam of all believer men and women after me and the guardian (Wali) of all believer men and women after me.

Chief of scholars, Akhtab Khwarizmi has recorded this sentence from Zaid bin Arqam, Abdur Rahman lbne Abi Laylah and lbne Abbas, in Akhbaare Hadeethe Ghadeere Khum. So also Ahmad bin Hanbal, Ibne Maghazili Shafei and lbne Mardooyah have quoted it from Buraidah who says:

“I returned from Yemen and went to meet the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) as I wanted to complain against Ali.” The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) was upset and angry and he said:

"O Buraid! Do I not have greater right on the believers than their own selves?"

I submitted: Yes, O Prophet of Allah: Then he said:

"Of whomsoever I am the master, Ali is also his master. Verily, Ali is your chief among all people after me.”

And among all the proofs is the holy verse:

يَا أَيُّهَا الرَّسُولُ بَلِّغْ مَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِنْ رَبِّكَ

"0 Apostle! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord. "(Al-Maidah, 5:67)

And so is the verse of:

الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ

"This day have I perfected for you your religion ...,” (Al- Maidah, 5:3)

And so is the verse of:

سَأَلَ سَائِلٌ بِعَذَابٍ وَاقِعٍ

"One demanding, demanded the chastisement which must befall. ,” (Al-Ma’arij,70:1)

As for the meaning of all these verses and the contexts in which they were revealed quite cJearly and definitely show that Maula only implies one having precedence in discretion, which is the position of Imam and Caliph.

Among other evidences is what Ahmad bin Hanbal and others have reported that Amirul Momineen (a.s.) made the Muslims swear and asked from the pulpit of Kufa Masjid, those who had heard the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) in Ghadeer Khum making the above statement to stand up and testify. Eighty persons got up and testified that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) had on that day and at that place held up the hand of Ali (a.s.) and asked the audience:

"Do you know that I have greater right on the believers than they have on themselves?" They replied: "It i s true, O Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.)."

Thereafter the HoJy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said:

"Of Whomsoever I am the master; this Ali is also his master."

It is obvious that had the meaning of Maula not been preferred in obedience and if it only meant friend or helper, it would not have been proper and logical for Ali (a.s.) to call upon the people to testify on oath. Such demand would have been meaningless and out of place, because being friend and assistant of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) did not grant any special distinction to Ali (a.s.) as all Muslims have this virtue of loving and befriending and assisting the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.).

It is also a logical proof known to all that there were some specialties in the event of Ghadeer Khum. There were more than seventy thousand Muslims and they were scattered. The distance between the first and the last of them was at least four Farsakh (24 Kms). The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) ordered all of them to gather at one place and that too during the midday heat in summer (in Arabia) when people placed cloaks under their feet and covered their heads from the sun. Then a stage was constructed of stones and camels saddles. The place of the meet was not pre-arranged and the huge caravan was not to halt there. Then the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) took Ali (a.s.) up on the said stage in such a manner that all should see him clearly. Then he said:

Am I not having more right on you than you have on your own selves?

When the audience replied: "Yes" the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) commanded: "Those who are present here should inform those who are absent that Ali is the Maula for whom I am his Maula. Then he (s.a.w.s.) prayed:

"O Allah, love one who loves him and be inimical to one who is inimical to him . ."

These circumstantial evidences clearly show that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) did not do anything, but appoint Ali as Imam and Caliph of Muslims. No sane person would ever make so many extraordinary and painstaking arrangements just to tell thousands of Muslims that Ali was a friend of one whose friend he was. For more details and replies to objections, please refer to Kifayatul Muwahhideen.

Question 27

Q.27: His Eminence, Amirul Momineen (a.s.) had, during the war with Khawarij, given drinking water to his army both at the higher area and the lower area of a well simultaneously. Because of this extraordinary happening, extremists have exaggerated in their belief about Ali (a.s.). Did the said extraordinary event take place due to the greatness of the spirit of Ali (a.s.)? Kindly explain this matter convincingly.

A: It is true that often Amirul Momineen (a.s.) used to be present at several places at one and the same time. These occurrences are reported in many traditions and therefore agreed upon. For example, the army of the infidels had split into eighteen parts and Ali (a.s.) was hitting them with his sword at the end of every section during the Battle of Khyber.

Likewise during the Battle of Siffeen, the army of Kutaibah had 25000 men and Ali (a.s.) had fought with them single-handed and defeated them and those who had fled had told Muawiyah: 'Wherever we looked, we saw Ali hitting us with his sword and spear. ‘There are several such reports about Ali being visible at several places simultaneously. As regards this condition of the holy Imam several causes have been mentioned. In one of them, Allamah Majlisi has in Biharul Anwar mentioned that in every such instance the body of Ali (a.s.) was not his physical but facsimile body. A facsimile is one which is very fine and looks exactly like the physical body, without any difference in appearance. It is like the body of angel or jinn.

Souls or spirits are like that in the world of Purgatory (Barzakh). By the power granted to them by Almighty Allah, the bosom friends of Allah are able to appear in their facsimile bodies at several places at a time and to do whatever they want at every place.

The late Haji Noori has also given other reasons at the end of his Darus Salam. Those who like may refer to it.

Question 28

Q.28: 'Ghashwah' is unconsciousness, which cannot be inflicted on an Imam. It is said that His Eminence, Amirul Momineen (a.s.) used to become unconscious during nights for fear of Allah and His Might; that he became like dried wood. It is also mentioned in

some narrations that on his deathbed, Imam Hasan (a.s.) had told his brother: There is

no unconsciousness for us. When Israel (angel of death) arrived, Imam Hasan (a.s.) pressed his brother's hand and during Ghashwah man's mind does not work. How is it possible for the mind of an Imam to stop functioning when he is the Proof of Allah? There seems to be contradiction between the two narrations mentioned above.

A: What cannot overtake an Imam is the failing of brain and consciousness, which means madness, insanity, lunacy or mania. But what happens during Ghashwah is that man becomes so deeply attentive to Almighty Allah that his mind does not get diverted to anything else as happened in case of Imam Baqir (a.s.) when he was offering ritual prayer and his child fell into a well or like the condition of Imam Sajjad (a.s.) when his house caught fire when he was in ritual prayer, and his not being aware of it. This deep engagement in ritual prayer sometimes becomes so intense that one does not feel what happens even to his own body. '

Summarily, the said conditions were the result of perfect feeling and intenseness of attention to Almighty Allah. In other words, it was a lofty manifestation of the effulgence of his mind.

It is mentioned in Jamius Sadat of Agha Naraqi that once an arrow got stuck in the leg of Imam Ali (a.s.) and nobody was able to draw it out. Then Fatima (a.s.) said: You may remove it when Ali (a.s.) is engaged in Ritual Prayer as he will then not feel any pain. So they took it out when Ali (a.s.) was in Ritual Prayer and he did not feel any pain.

Though this narration is very famous, I could not find any reliable evidence of it. Also it is rather difficult to imagine. How can an arrow pierce a man's leg and get stuck in it for long. Had the arrow with an iron head remained in the leg of Ali (a.s.)? Can such an arrow remain in such condition and man can get any rest and that the Imam may not have strength enough to fetch it out except during Ritual Prayer unless it is said that small pieces of a broken arrow had remained in the holy leg of the holy Imam as what the word Nast used in a narration indicates.

There are some who question how is it that the Imam who paid attention to a beggar who was about to go out of the Masjid and gave him his finger ring during Ritual Prayer remained unaware when an arrow was drawn out of his own leg?

Our reply is that there are degrees or levels in one's attention during Prayers. The first degree of man's attention is such in which man pays attention to his Lord Creator but he also remains aware of other things. The last degree is such in which the attention is so deep that one thinks only of God and pays no attention to any other thing. It is obvious that one does not always remain in one level at all times. Same was the case of Imam Ali (a.s.). He was fully attentive to God during his prayers but the level or degree did vary.

So we say that there is no contradiction in the aforesaid two matters. His giving a ring to someone during Ritual Prayer does not mean that he was not attentive to God because that act also was a part and a kind of worship both commanded by God. He obeyed God 's both the commands viz. of bowing before him (Rukoo) and of paying Zakat (poor due). The holy verse says: "and pay the poor-rate while they bow." In short, both the deeds of the Imam were the result of his attention to God and His worship and His obedience).

That is how the holy Imams did always have a desire to be in such condition at all times. On the contrary they considered it a defect not to be in that state and sought pardon from God. This kind of extreme and deep attention to Almighty Lord and thinking about His might and power affected their heart in way similar to unconsciousness in which people fall on account of illness or other reasons. This is why this state is named Ghashwah. Otherwise there is a wide difference between common unconsciousness and Ghashwah during prayers; because in normal Ghashwah man loses all senses whereas Ghashwah of worship keeps one totally attentive to the Lord removing his or her attention from everything else.

Question 29

Q.29: While reciting Ziyarat Ashura, in one sentence, we say: 'that I may avenge your blood ' and in another part 'that I may avenge my blood'. ls the sentence demanding tlte revenge of· our own blood to show attachment of Shias with Imam Husain (a.s.) or it has any other reason?

A: There are some reasons for the visitor of Imam Husain (a.s.) referring to the blood (Thaar) of the Imam, which implies demanding vengeance of blood.

One of these reasons is same as hinted in this question, because all Shia have spiritual connection with the Imam and in this sense; they are almost parts of the Imam's existence. That is why they said:

"Our Shia are created from our remaining clay (Teenat) and they are kneaded in our Wilayat."

Amirul Momineen (a.s.) told Rameela: Whenever any of our Shias is hurt either in the east or in the west (of the world), we are also injured.

So also, Imam Ridha’ (a.s.), in reply to one who asked him, "Sometimes I become either gloomy or happy without there being any cause for it" had said: It is as an effect of either the unhappiness or happiness of the Imam (a.s.).

Another reason is that it is usual in both Arab and non-Arab languages that whenever any calamity befalls their chief or leader they relate it to themselves and say: We have taken this trouble or we have shed our blood etc. Obviously Imam is the chief of all his followers and hence it is quite proper for them that when his blood is shed, they relate it to themselves and demand its vengeance.

Yet another reason: Doubtlessly had Bani Umayyah not dared and had they not allowed such oppression to the Imam, his brother and father and had they not taken away the right from whom it belonged and had they not usurped Caliphate and rulership, which in fact belonged to Infallible Imam, no oppression to faithful believers would have ever been done and their blood would have never shed and thus, in fact, every injustice, which will be done till Judgment Day, will be in the account of those who usurped the rights of the Progeny of Muhammad (a.s.):

"If the mason puts the corner stone incorrectly, the wall will rise incorrectly upto the sky."

This shows that the blood that was shed was not of only the oppressed Imam (a.s.), on the contrary it was of all believers and thus not only the Progeny of Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) were oppressed but all believers till Judgment Day - curse of Allah be on all the enemies of Imam Husain (a.s.).

Question 30 "Peace be in you O blood of Allah!"

Q.30: I had arguments with a Christian regarding trinity. He said: Just as you calI Imam Husain (a.s.) blood of God and the son of God so do we call Isa the son of God. In reply I told him: Our calling is by way of an allegorical formality whereas you do not regard the son of God allegorical and believe that he is really the son of God and believe that God has a body. Kindly discuss this subject in detail and remove the criticism.

A: Meaning of blood (Thaar) is call for revenge of blood, which has been shed unjustly and so the meaning of saying, "Peace be on you, O blood of Allah," is that is you are the son of the one whose blood has been demanded by God. And since Imam Husain (a.s.), among the entire creation, has more exclusiveness with Allah and he is nearer to Allah than others, that is why his demand is called Allah's demand.

In other words, the one who can demand blood vengeance in his case is Allah as his blood was shed in Allah's path to exalt the word of monotheism and in opposition to infidelity and transgression, both verbally and physically, in which he as well as his friends and relatives were killed. Thus this reference to blood and its vengeance is allegorical, not actual because, it is obvious that Allah has no body or physicality. It is like calling the mosque 'the house of Allah '. You will not find a single Muslim who believes that Allah has a body which may be in a Masjid.

When one says or hears the words o blood of Allah ' he knows and is sure that these words are allegorical not actual. But it is not so when Christians call Isa Masih 'son of God '. Here is a factual birth of a human being, just like that of a man, an animal or a vegetable. The sperm, in stages turns into the being which is like the one whose sperm was the cause of its birth.

Obviously this is impossible in case of Almighty Allah, because it demands a body and matter and God has neither. Secondly, it is known to all and believed by all that everyone and everything owes its existence and its being to Almighty Allah. Thus how is it possible to separate something which is permanently a part of it and which is similar to it in essence

qualities and laws without being in need of Him, which was the real meaning of 'son of God ' and it is very unlikely for the Christians to imply the real meaning of the term of ‘son of God’ to His Eminence, Isa (a.s.).

As for the invalidity of intending the figurative meaning of 'son of God ' it i s that implication of 'son ' is abstract separation of a thing from another in such a way that it should be similar to it in reality without material and gradual passage of time.

Thus we say that intention in this figurative meaning is also wrong; because all evidences mentioned to prove oneness of a knowing God, may He be glorified, negate getting an individual among the creatures who is independent and similar to the knowing God in reality and effects; on the contrary the claim is that there is among creatures an individual, independent and similar to the knowing God and that is His Eminence, Masih (a.s.) and therefore he is the son of God; this is obviously contradictory; because if he is a creature, his needfulness of an original cause in every dimension is obvious and thus it is wrong to assume that he is independent and if he is independent and similar to the final cause, his being a creature is impossible.

Also how can anyone deny the creatibility of Isa (a.s.) and that he remained in the womb of his holy mother and then was born like all other babies and was brought up in her hands and passed through all stages of man's life like hunger, thirst and feelings of happiness and sorrow or grief and requirement of rest and sleep etc.?

The extraordinary and unusual miracles shown by Isa (a.s.), like reviving the dead, creating a bird and curing a born blind and leper and likewise, his being without a father none of these can grant him godhood, because such things were manifested both before and after him through human beings, who were granted prophethood or guardianship by Allah.

The father of mankind, Adam (a.s.) was born without father and mother and yet no one claimed his divinity. Every one of the divine messengers like Prophet Nuh, Salih , Ibrahim, Musa and others have shown unusual and miraculous things as recorded in scriptures and none of them ever claimed godhood.

The biggest proof of Isa being God's creation is his holiness’s worships and supplications and his call to people to worship Almighty Allah and so also his extreme humility before Only One God. All this shows that Isa Masih did not possess divinity and that he was, like all other human beings, a creation of God and His servant.

Hence it is mentioned at various places in the gospels that Masih (a.s.) called himself a man and a son of man. Even in the present Bible books it is not found that he never claimed divinity. Rather he called everyone to Lord Creator of all. It is mentioned in the Holy Quran:

لَنْ يَسْتَنْكِفَ الْمَسِيحُ أَنْ يَكُونَ عَبْدًا لِلَّهِ

"The Messiah does by no means disdain that he should be a servant of Allah ..." (An-Nisa, 4: 172)

For detailed explanation refer to Tafsirul Mizan.

If Christians say: "We call Jesus, son of God just to honor him", we would say that it is a contradictory statement. Just refer to what is written about him in the present Bibles. For example, in John, Chapter 14, p. 173: If do you not believe that I am in father and father is in me? The words which I tell you, I am not telling you of my own but the father who is living in me is doing these deeds; So testify me that I am in father and father is in me.

At page 161, in the Book of John, it is mentioned: Because I have been issued from God and have come, beca use I have not arrived of my own but He has sent me.

Also in Chapter 10, page 165 it is said: I and my father are one till end. These explicit beliefs in words of this Chapter clearly show transmigration and 'being joined ' indicating that, Isa (a.s.) is having special characteristic among all men and a connection just like between man

and son. So their saying that they call Isa (a.s.) as son of God just for respect is not correct, because they indeed believe him to be the son of God.

Even if it is taken for granted that what they claim now is true there indeed is a big difference between the Shia's calling Husain (a.s.) blood of Allah (Thaarullaah) and the Christians calling Isa (a.s.) as son of God (lbnullaah). If a word is used just by way of respect, it is necessary that there should be something in the context to show that it is merely allegorical and not in the word's actual and real meaning. It is fundamental Shia belief that God does not have a body, whereas it is not so in case of Christians, whose basic belief rests on trinity.

Question 31

Q.31: Was His Eminence, Isa (a.s.) in charge of the bathing the seventh Imam (a.s.)? Please quote the narrations in this connection. It is said that His Eminence, Ahmad bin Musa (a.s.) was elder than Imam Ridha’ (a.s). Do the narrations support this?

A: The person in charge of bathing Imam Musa Kazim (a.s.) was apparently Sulaiman, cousin of His Eminence, but Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) arrived all the way from Medina to become the overseer of the funeral bath without anyone being able to recognize him. It is mentioned in Vol. 11 of Biharul Anwar that Ali bin Hamza asked the Imam:

"We have heard from your holy ancestors that none but only an Imam can perform the final rituals of a deceased Imam? (The questioner meant to say: You were in Medina when your father passed away in Baghdad). The Imam replied:

Was Imam Husain bin Ali an Imam or not? He replied: Yes, he was. The Imam asked: Who oversaw the burial of the Imam? That man replied: His son, Ali bin Husain (a.s.).

The Imam again asked: Where was Ali bin Husain at that time? In fact at that time, he was a prisoner of the cursed Ziyad.

Then he said: He came to Kerbala without anyone recognizing him, oversaw his father's burial and returned to the prison. The Imam said: The same God, Who gave such ability to Ali bin Husain (a.s.) also gave the power to the master of this affair (Imam of the time - Imam Ridha’) to come to Baghdad while he was not even in captivity.

As for the fact that Ahmad bin Musa was elder to Imam Ridha’ (a.s.); we have not found any such thing in books of traditions.

Question 32

إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ

"Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, 0 people of the House!" (Al-Ahzab, 33:33)

Q.32: What is the reply if Sunnis claim that all the wives of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) were part of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) as mentioned in the above verse?

A: The above quoted Verse of Purification is a part of verse 33 of Surah Ahzab and the whole verse reads:

وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىٰ وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا

"And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from yo11, O people of the House! And to purify you a (thorough) purifying. "(Al-Ahzab, 33:33)

The first part of the verse is an address to the wives of the Prophet and the last applies to the household (Ahlul Bayt) of the Prophet and they are only Muhammad, Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain (a.s.) and that is why the masculine pronoun is used.

Though this verse is placed with the addresses to the wives of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.), it was revealed separately and independently in the apartment of Umme Salma and there are evidences of this in narrations.

In Ghayatul Maraam, 41 traditions from Sunni sources and 34 traditions from Shia sources are quoted according to which this verse was revealed separately and that it is related especially to the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) and that the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) are also the five persons. For example, here is a tradition from Sunni sources:

Ibne Sabbagh Maliki, in Fusoolul Muhimma and Asbaabun Nuzool narrates through his own chains of narrators that Umme Salma said: Once the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) was in the apartment of Fatima (a.s.) when he said: Call Ali and your two sons. When they arrived, and sat down and when the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) himself also was seated having a piece of Khybari cloth on it.

Umme Salma said: I also was in that apartment and near them all. Then the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) took the Khybari sheet and covered those persons saying: O Allah, these are My Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) and especially mine. So keep away filth from them and cleanse them. Umme Salma said: Putting my head in, I said:

O Messenger of God: I am also with them you. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w. s.) said: You are good and towards good. At this moment, this verse was revealed:

إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا

"Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, 0 people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying. "(Al-Ah'zab, 33:33)

In the narration of Abu Naeem it is like this: Umme Salma said: O Messenger of Allah: Am I not from the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.)? The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) said: You are in the right direction and you are from the wives of the prophet.2

The word of Rijs in this verse means spiritual uncleanness and diseases of the heart like infidelity, polytheism, hypocrisy, pride, self-conceit, jealousy and similar other mean characteristics and the source of all of them is narrowness of heart and ignorance about reality.

Thus cleansing of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) by the Almighty Allah means that Allah granted them spaciousness of heart, expansion of spirit, greatness of soul, purity of conscience, enlightenment about truth, seeking of truth and submission before truth in a manner that they will never voluntarily indulge in any sin, not go astray and never revolt against His commands. Same is the meaning of infallibility, which is a pre-condition of prophethood and Imamate.

Thus the verse of purification defines the position of infallibility and is related only to Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). The Imamites and many Sunni scholars agree on this meaning. As against this, some earlier narrators like Akrama and Urwah bin Zubair and a number of Sunni scholars say that the verse of purification, like earlier verses, includes all the wives of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.).

In reply, we say that people like Akrama, Maqaatil and Urwah etc. are not reliable, because as mentioned by a number of great Sunni scholars, they were enemies of Amirul Momineen. (a.s.) and it is alleged that they did not desist from lying. Also, to refute what they say, it is enough to state that two wives of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.): Umme Salma and Ayesha, as per some narrations, have testified that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) excluded his wives from the scope of this verse.

As regards the saying of Sunni commentators that since this verse is joined with the addresses to wives of the Prophet, the context shows that they should be included in the application of purification. In reply, we say that firstly, after the abovementioned testimony of the two holy wives, their claim becomes irrelevant and secondly, context can be a proof when there is no contradiction between the former and latter sentence either in words or in meaning. Such contradiction is seen here. In the first address, the pronoun is plural female whereas in the verse of purification, it is male plural. This was about the words. As regards the meaning, in the first part there is a tone of warning and wrath whereas in the verse of purification, which is addressed to the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) there is mercy and respect. This is a clear difference.

Thirdly, as said earlier, more than 70 narrations testify that the first address is to the wives of Prophet and the verse of purification is related to Ahlul Bayt (a.s.), that is, to the holy five, viz. Muhammad, Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain (a.s.).

Also there is consensus that the two verses were revealed separately.

Notes

1. Maniul Akhbar, Pg. 65

2. Refer Al Fusulal Muhimma, Pg. 305; Asbabun Nuzul. Pg. 299

Resurrection (Maad)

Question 33

Q.33: Will all animals, birds and creatures along with humans be gathered on Judgment Day? From the viewpoint of belief in immortality of soul, where will their souls rest?

A: Since information about the particulars of Hereafter in detail cannot be acquired except through revelation, which is based either on Quran and sayings of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) and as neither have specified anything related to animals, a general belief is sufficient. The Holy Quran says:

وَإِذَا الْوُحُوشُ حُشِرَتْ

"And when the wild animals are made to go forth, "(At-Takwir, 81:5)

Some commentators have said that this verse is about what is to happen before Judgment Day and it conveys that wild animals will come out of their abodes and get mixed up with other animals. It is mentioned in Surah Anam:

وَمَا مِنْ دَابَّةٍ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَلَا طَائِرٍ يَطِيرُ بِجَنَاحَيْهِ إِلَّا أُمَمٌ أَمْثَالُكُمْ ۚ مَا فَرَّطْنَا فِي الْكِتَابِ مِنْ شَيْءٍ ۚ ثُمَّ إِلَىٰ رَبِّهِمْ يُحْشَرُونَ

"And there is no animal that walks upon the earth nor a bird that flies with its two wings but (they are) genera like yourselves; We have not neglected anything in the Book, then to their Lord shall they be gathered.” (Al-An’aam, 6:38)

It is mentioned in these verses that the animals will be gathered, but it is not said how it will be effected and how they will be dealt with; and what their end will be. This information is also not available in reliable traditions in detail. Hence, a general belief in it is enough.

Allamah Majlisi in his Haqqul Yaqeen, quotes some narrations and says: Apparently it is understood that some animals will be gathered and that they will seek justice in the matter of the oppression meted out to them by human beings and that some animals will be gathered for some other purposes and some like the she-camel of Prophet Salih (a.s.), the dog of the People of the Cave, wolf of Prophet Yusuf (a.s.) and the donkey of Balam Baaoor will enter Paradise. Reliable narrations do not indicate the gathering of all animals.

Therefore, most Shia scholars have talked about this in general terms without going in detail. It is mentioned in Tafsir Minhaj that after gathering and dispensing justice, the concerned animals will be turned into dust and will not remain alive. But those animals that give pleasure to human beings, like peacock and its like will remain alive and then adds that what is more correct is that they will not remain alive.

But the other creations like angels and jinns and satans will doubtlessly be gathered. The angels will go to Paradise and jinns and satans, except those who had believed, will go to Hell. However, there is a difference of opinion about the abode of the believing ones from them. Some have said that they will live in Paradise, but in a place lower than that of men. Some say that they would live in Araaf. The first words seem to be more likely, especially through verses of Surah Rahman, which speak of the bounties of Paradise. There is an address to both: ji nns and human beings.

Question 34

Q.34: Who are the 'deprived ones' (Mustazafeen)1 ? Please explain how they will be gathered and rewarded or punished?

A: This matter has been explained in reply to question 8 regarding divine justice. For further details please refer to what Allamah Majlisi (r.a.) says in his Haqqul Yaqeen. According to him summarily, it must be believed that there are proofs and evidences to show that in the holy verses and narrations that the Almighty Allah is always just and He is never unjust or wrong to anyone and therefore He will never punish those who are minor or insane or those before whom arguments are not completed or whose intellects cannot distinguish between right and wrong. He will make them live in Araaf, which is between Paradise and Hell, or He will place them at a lower level in Paradise or make them servants of the folks of Paradise.

In an authentic tradition, Kulaini has quoted from Zurarah that he asked Imam Sadiq (a.s.): What will happen to children who die before maturity? He replied that the query was put to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and he replied that God knows better, which means that the matter should be left to Him and no more inquiry is advisable in this regard as God will deal with them as demanded by His justice or grace.

It should also be known that if they are made to serve the people of Paradise, such service will not be hard; but they will get pleasure from it just as angels enjoy their duties. It should be clear that whatever was mentioned about Mustazafeen was about other than the children of believers and apparently it does have any contradiction if in the hereafter they join their parents in Paradise and add to their happiness.

It is also mentioned in Al-Kafi, Faqeeh and Tawhid Sadooq that Imam Sadiq (a.s.) said: Though children of the faithful were unable to do any good themselves, God will make them join their parents and please them in Paradise.

Question 35

Q.35: Please describe how will be the gathering and reward or chastisement (on Judgment Day) of one who eats up another and one eaten up by another?

A: Some philosophers have raised a doubt regarding reward or punishment in the Hereafter (bodily punishment/ reward) of a person who eats up another and of one eaten up by another. They say that, in such circumstances, the body of one fully becomes a part of the other's body. In this case, if on Judgment Day, the eater's body is made to rise, the one who was eaten up is not raised as his body has become a part of the eater. In case one who was eaten up is raised (had he or she not become a part of another's body) then the eater's body will remain incomplete.

They also say that doubtlessly the parts of everyone's body go on changing from birth till death. So, will all the parts during the whole life be raised or it will be only the parts present at one's death? How will the parts of one who has become part of another be raised for punishment or reward? If only the parts at the time of death are raised, it is possible that one had, after committing wrong in the past, performed good deeds at the last moment. Thus, if they are rewarded, it will be no justice as the earlier evils will remain unpunished. People will not thus get their due!

As for the root of the doubt: Many religions have replied this question in their own ways which are satisfactory. One of them is the reply of Khwaja Nasiruddin Tusi (r.a.) in his Tajreedul Kalam. He writes: Every person has some original parts, which remain his throughout his life and do not change.

There also are some parts other than original ones, which continue to change all the time. They constantly require food. During illness such changes take place. Man becomes weak and feels that some of his physical parts have become diluted. The parts of the body which will be raised in Qiyamat will be the original and unchanging parts, which do not become part of any other body even if one eats up another. It is only the soluble or dilutable parts which mix up with dust (in grave). Parts which have remained unchanged will, by the Omniscient God, be made to come and gather for getting their due.

Question 36

Q.36: There are some deeds the reward for which seems impossible. One asks how then it would be rewarded. Kindly explain.

A: This misunderstanding mainly arises because we imagine that life of Purgatory (Barzakh) and Hereafter will be just like this worldly life. There are certain things which satisfy our needs in a particular way through particular things in this world. Also some things give tastes.

What one forgets is that the availability of anything more or less in a big quantity or small depends on the size of the place where one is. For example take the case of a baby in its mother's womb. It is living there in absolute comfort. If it is told: Very soon you will be transferred to a place millions of times larger than your present abode. On the contrary you cannot even imagine its vastness; there you will require a house a thousand times bigger than this; you will need food, which will have to be prepared in various ways; you will also need different clothings etc.

If the baby on hearing all this expresses its astonishment and says all this is exaggeration, will it be wrong? It lives comfortably in a small space of a few centimeters and gets its nourishment through the naval even without making any effort or movement. It would ask how it would need the things mentioned, but such imagination is of course incorrect.

Likewise, one who is a prisoner of the material world asks: How is it possible to see and get huge and plentiful palaces and various high class food and clothes etc. promised in Paradise? How man would be able to enjoy those things? Here also what one forgets is that it will be a world, which is so vast that in it, one gets all kinds of tastes and enjoyments instantly and also effortlessly. As long as the soul is imprisoned in this material world, it cannot imagine the vastness of the other world. The Holy Quran says:

فَلَا تَعْلَمُ نَفْسٌ مَا أُخْفِيَ لَهُمْ مِنْ قُرَّةِ أَعْيُنٍ

"So no soul knows what is hidden for them of that which will refresh the eyes..." (As- Sajdah, 32: 17)

Question 37

Q.37: Please give arguments disproving transmigration of souls (Tanaasukh).

A: Transmigration of souls (Tanasukh) means attachment of souls, after dissolution of the elemental bodies, with other bodies in the same perceptible world. There are many groups which believe in transmigration of souls. Some say that the human soul, after death and decay of his body is transferred to the body of another person and this group is called Nasookhiyah.

Another group believes in transmigration of human soul after death to bodies of animals, beasts or reptiles in accordance with their deeds. For example, souls of auspicious persons to bodies of noble animals, like horse etc. and souls of vicious fellows to bodies of wretched animals like dog or pig; like soul of a brave person to body of a tiger; that of a harmful and brutal fellow to body of a wolf; soul of a greedy and avaricious person to body of an ant or mouse etc. This group is called Mansookhiyah.

Yet another group believes in transmigration of human soul after death to vegetables, trees, grass etc. and this group is called Fusookhiyah.

Yet another group says that souls turn into materials like stone and this group has been named Rusookhiyah.

Thus believers in transmigration of souls are of four kinds:

Nusookhiyah. Mansookhiyah. Fusookhiyah and Rusookhiyah.

Still there also are other absurd beliefs, the description of which will make discussion very lengthy. All these beliefs are wrong.

Firstly, this belief is against essentials of lslam (rather against all heavenly religions) because according to Islam the souls, after death and after questioning in grave and end of Purgatory (Barzakh - after death till Resurrection), will be raised once again with bodies they had in their worldly lives and that in Qiyamat, after accounting of their deeds, will be either rewarded or punished as explained in detail before. Believers in transmigration of souls reject all these essentials: like Paradise, Hell and everything related to them. On the contrary, in

their view, rewards and punishments can be given only in this world. They deny that God-worship and good deeds will lead to heaven and evil deeds will send one to Hell. Thus all arguments based on true religion reject this be lief of transmigration of souls.

Secondly, when body is perfected in the womb and is ready to be connected to the soul, the soul created by Almighty Allah's graceful source joins with it. In these circumstances, if the soul, which departed from a body after death, again joins with this body, it would be joining of two souls in one body, which is wrong both from the viewpoint of essentials and logic, because everyone knows that he or she has only one soul not more.

Thirdly, we say that a body from the time of its creation, advances towards perfection and all its perfections appear in stages of action. Likewise, the soul or spirit, during its connection with the body, advances towards perfection and its faculties acquire abilities. How then is it possible for it to connect with a body, which is merely an embryo and a defective body? It would necessitate that a perfect soul should become imperfect to advance to perfection along with an imperfect body.

There are other reasons as well in rejection of transmigration of souls, but what is said is sufficient here. What is necessary to mention is that in Islam, there are two kinds of deformation (Maskh) and both are contrary to what the above mentioned believers in transmigration of souls believe:

One of them is worldly deformation and the other is disfigurement in Hereafter. The former is one in which Almighty Allah, to admonish all people in the world, punished those who revolted against God, who left God-worship, defied His commands and mean thoughts got rooted in their hearts making them wayward; and who led others on the wrong path. God hastened to disfigure them making their faces according to their inner state. Therefore some changed into monkeys, some dogs and some pigs. The Holy Quran says:

وَجَعَلَ مِنْهُمُ الْقِرَدَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ

"...and of whom He made apes and swine..." (Al- Maidah, 5:60)

In the case of People of Saturday (Ashaabe Sabt) He says:

فَقُلْنَا لَهُمْ كُونُوا قِرَدَةً خَاسِئِينَ

"…so We said to them: Be (as) apes, despised and hated. "(Al-Baqarah, 2:65)

Obviously this is against what believers in transmigration of souls say, because according to them, after death the souls of the deceased enter bodies of similar animals as mentioned earlier and what the Holy Quran mentions is the changing of one's outer appearance into what is in one's interior.

They initially possessed human bodies, but since their deeds were extremely disgraceful and they were adamant, the Almighty Allah changed their bodies into animal forms in such a way that their relatives and acquaintances could recognize them even after they were turned into animals and they themselves also would recognize their acquaintances and even talk to them. Their acquaintances would ask them: Did we not admonish and restrain you from evil? Since they could not justify, they would only weep.

According to numerous narrations, those whom the Almighty Allah had disfigured could not, thereafter, live for more than three days and animals of this world are actually offspring of animals other than the said disfigured ones. The reason why these animals are called disfigured (Mansookhaat) is that some evil human beings were turned into their forms and were destroyed thereafter. ·

As regards disfigurement of hereafter, what is mentioned in a number of traditions of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) is that on the day of Grand Gathering in Hereafter some people will arrive with appearance of what they were internally in their worldly lives, that is, according to what they had earned through the freedom given to them. It will have nothing to do with bodies of other creatures (as believers in transmigration of souls say). They will appear as they were intemally. They will be recognized by others, who will know who he is and how he or she was.

In other words, on Judgment Day, the internal will overcome the external. As a holy verse says:

يَوْمَ تُبْلَى السَّرَائِرُ

"On the day when hidden things shall be made manifest...” (At- Tariq, 86:9)

Hence some people will appear like angels, as they did not do anything in the world but good. Their deeds were like deeds of angels. They worshipped and obeyed only One God and never committed any evil and all benefited from them. Contrary to this, some people whose faces will be like their interior and as ugly as Satan. They will be those who committed only evil in the world and others were only harmed and deceived by them. Their deeds were devilish.

There will be yet another group of people who will appear like pigs and other carnivorous animals; some like quadrupeds and some in form of insects and reptiles etc. as mentioned in a following verse:

وَنَحْشُرُهُمْ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ عَلَىٰ وُجُوهِهِمْ

"...and We will gather them together on the day of resurrection on their faces ...” (Al-Isra, 17:97)

It is mentioned in some commentaries of Quran that: 'Like animals whose heads are downward'. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) is reported to have said:

"Indeed Allah will gather the people according to their intentions on Judgment Day."

He also said:

"'People will be gathered with their intentions and their inner beings and they will be gathered with the faces worse than that of monkeys and pigs."

It is mentioned in Tafsir Majmaul Bayan referri ng to the holy verse:

يَوْمَ يُنْفَخُ فِي الصُّورِ فَتَأْتُونَ أَفْوَاجًا

"The day on which the trumpet shall be blown so you shall co1ne /orth in hosts. “(An-Naba 78: 1 8)

That the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) said: My Ummah will be gathered in ten different forms as distinguished by Almighty Allah from Muslims and with their forms changed. Some are in form of monkeys, some pigs and some upside down. They will be killed in this condition through divine chastisement. Some are blind, some deaf and some dumb and they don't understand anything. Some chew their own tongues. Puss flows from their mouths, which is abhorred by all in the field of Gathering. There also will be some with their hands and feet cut off; some will be hung by branches of fire. Some give out foul smell worse than rotten corpses. Some would wear shirts of tar sticking to their skins.

In the form of monkeys are those who slandered others and created trouble through tale telling; like pigs are those who did not keep away from unlawful acts; walking upside down were usurers; blind are the oppressive rulers and men of power; deaf and dumb are the self-conceited; who chew their own tongue were judges and scholars who acted against their own statements; those who harassed their neighbors would have their hands and feet cut off; fellows hanging on fire branches used to aid oppressive rulers and those who stink worse than corpses are followers of lust and who did not pay God's rights from their property; wearing clothes of fire are the proud and arrogant ones.

There are many traditions of this kind, but this much is sufficient.

Question 38

Q.38: What will be the state of time in the Hereafter?

A: Time, which means quantum of movement of celestial orbits and revolution of earth around the sun, is not there in the Hereafter. Light in the Hereafter means radiance of good deeds and righteous people and darkness means infidelity and sins. Paradise is always shining

brightly with the light of the believers and Hell is permanently dark due to the injustice of wrongdoers.

Question 39

Q.39: Is eternal stay in Paradise and Hell until God is Almighty and hence unlimited?

A: One whom Almighty Allah admits to Paradise will never be expelled from it undoubtedly as Paradise is his eternal abode.

جَزَاؤُهُمْ عِنْدَ رَبِّهِمْ جَنَّاتُ عَدْنٍ تَجْرِي مِنْ تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا اأَبَدً

"Their reward with their Lord is gardens of perpetuity beneath which rivers flow, abiding therein forever. " (Al-Bayyinah, 98:8)

But, as regards those who enter Hell, if they have even an iota of faith, they would finally be brought out and admitted to Paradise. They would not remain in Hell forever, but in case of unbelievers and hypocrites, there will be no limit for their stay in Hell.

وَمَا هُمْ بِخَارِجِينَ مِنَ النَّارِ

"...and they shall not come forth from the fire." (Al-Baqarah, 2:167)

If someone says: If punishment is eternal for committing evil deeds in a limited brief life, it would tantamount to injustice, we may reply that their permanent abode in Hell is not due to their limited sins. On the contrary, it is because of an established matter that they earned in the world and which is never ending. It is their personal disbelief, villainy and rebellion. Likewise permanent stay of believers in Paradise is also because of an established truth that they had true and sincere intentions and faith, love and sincerity. It is mentioned in Bihar:

Imam Sadiq (a.s.) said: The reason why people of Hell will remain in Hell forever is that their intention in the world was such that if they had lived in the world forever, they would always remained on disbelief and sins. So also the people of Paradise will remain in Paradise forever only because their intention in the world was that if they were to live in the world forever, they would have always lived with faith and obedience to their Lord. So the intentions of people are the only reasons for permanent dwelling of some in Paradise and some in Hell.

Question 40

قَالَ رَبِّ ارْجِعُونِ لَعَلِّي أَعْمَلُ صَالِحًا فِيمَا تَرَكْتُ كَلَّا

"Send me back, my Lord, send me back. Haply I may do

good in that which I have left.” (Al-Mominoon, 23:99-100)

"Testifier of your Second coming (Rajaa’)."2

Q.40: The above-quoted verse (1) appears in conflict with the sentence (2) in the Ziyarat. Please explain.

A: Second coming (Rajat) is one of the essentials of lmamite belief and it means that some pure believers will come to this world during reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) and the return of all members of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). Also the staunch deniers and polytheists will be brought back to the world once again.

Such a thing is logically possible and cannot be rejected in itself, because it is easy, keeping in mind the might of the Lord Creator. The purified Imams have informed us about it. Allamah Majlisi says: There are about twenty traditions about Rajat and so a summary trust in it is obligatory. However, it is not compulsory to know the exact manner of their coming back to this world and their duration of stay here and the names of persons who will come back etc.

The doubt which has been raised here is with respect to the holy verse in which the unbelievers, after their death, say: O God: Send us back to the world, so that we may do good deeds there. In reply, they are told: Never! Which means: You will never go back to the world. The apparent meaning of this holy verse is that one who died will not go back to the world whereas it has been authoritatively said that some infidels will return to the world during the second coming (Rajat).

Our reply is: The desire behind the asking of the disbeliever and which is not acceptable is that (by returning) they want to gain faith and ability to do good deeds and gather provisions for the Hereafter. But the promised second coming will be so that they might witness the rightful kingdom of Aale Muhammad (a.s.) and also that deniers and disbelievers may be killed at the hands of Aale Muhammad. Such return of disbelievers is a kind of punishment for their black deeds and by way of partial revenge. This coming back is also for compensating the grief of some believers to some extent and that they might also see the rightful divine government.

In other words, the second coming of some believers and disbelievers during the period of Rajat is only for attaining some positions or getting some rewards or punishments. It is not to complete their faith or that they may perform good deeds; that is why it is regarded as a part of Qiyamat. The Hour mentioned in some verses of Quran is explained by some commentators to mean second coming (Rajat). It is also said: The Days of God are three: Day of reappearance, Day of coming back and Day of Resurrection. Another narration also mentions: Day of Death and Judgment Day.

Question 41

Q.41: It is well known that during the reappearance of Imam Asr (a.t.f.s .) the absolute believer and the absolute disbeliever will return to this world. Firstly, the disbeliever, after he dies and comes to know about the situation of Hereafter, how again he will remain a disbeliever when he comes back to this world? The believer also, who passed his time of assigned duties, how will he again be duty-bound?

A: The one to whom, during his entire lifespan, God's arguments and proofs were made available and who observed all signs of Almighty Allah and yet did not believe and who was not influenced by the talks of God's messengers, will not believe even if he is made to die and re-enlivened thousands of times, because was he to believe, he would have done so on the first occasion.

وَلَوْ رُدُّوا لَعَادُوا لِمَا نُهُوا عَنْهُ وَإِنَّهُمْ لَكَاذِبُونَ

"...and if they were sent back, they would certainly go back to that which they are forbidden ..." (Al-An’aam ,6:28)

The secret behind this is that such a person, it seems, has no human life and that he is no better than an animal:

أُولَٰئِكَ كَالْأَنْعَامِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ

"...they are as cattle, nay, they are .worse errors...” (Al- A’araaf, 7: 179)

إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ الصُّمُّ الْبُكْمُ الَّذِينَ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ

"Surely the vilest of animals, in Allah's sight, are the deaf, the dumb, who do not understand. (Al-Anfaal, 8:22)

It is wrong to suppose that a disbeliever, after observing the Hereafter, would become a believer in his second coming to this world. Hopefully such doubt is removed from what we have said above. The disbeliever, even after his return to this world, would engage himself, as before, in fulfillment of his lusts, greed and passions and will forget all he had observed during death and thereafter in Purgatory (Barzakh). Even if he recalls it, he will regard it onJy as a fearful nightmare. Summarily, one who is so forgetful will remain an animal as before even if he is made to die and to become alive thousands of times. Likewise, one who preferred to be obstinate in disbelief will remain so in all his future lives.

As far as the condition of a believer during the second coming (Rajat) is concerned: No duty would be incumbent on him, on the contrary it is to enable him to scale some ranks of faith due to his good deeds in earlier life. It is to show him how the rule of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) will be so that he becomes happy by it. It is also likely that for some believers, besides what has been said, it may be a sort of perfection which he or she could not earn in his or her worldly life due to circumstances, like gaining martyrdom in the company of the Holy Imam (a.s.). If such was his desire, it is quite possible that when Imam (a.s.) will appear. he may come back to the world and get his desire fulfilled.

Imam Sadiq (a.s.) is reported to have said that according to the saying of the Almighty Allah:

وَيَوْمَ نَحْشُرُ مِنْ كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ فَوْجًا

"And on the day when We will gather from every nation a party ...” (Al Naml 27:83)

a believer killed before his ‘destined end' may return to this world so that he or she may see the end of his earlier life and may be fortunate. And a believer who could not attain the rank of a martyr in the path of God and who died may return and have his desire for martyrdom fulfilled.

Question 42

Q.42: ls the world of Purgatory (Barzakh) equal in the case of one who died a thousand years ago and one who dies today? Also please explain what the facsimile body (Qaalibe Mithaali) is.

A: The period of stay of souls in Barzakh till the Great Resurrection is, of course, varying but the souls, in Barzakh (duration between death and resurrection), are not inactive. Rather they enjoy the bounties of Barzakh (if they left the world in a pure and sinless condition), or they are being chastised with the punishment of Barzakh.

If they were Mustazafeen, that is. they did not have ability to distinguish truth from falsehood, or proofs and arguments leading one to truth did not approach them as they should have just like some residents of infidel countries and if they did not know about the difference between religions, or if they did know about it, they were unable to go to other countries to make further inquiries about true faith and likewise children and lunatics. There will be no questioning and punishment or reward in Barzakh for all such persons. Their fate is suspended until resurrection, when Almighty Allah will deal with them through either His justice or grace.

Facsimile body (Qaalibe Mthaali) means a body, which in appearance is just like the worldly body and the human soul gets attached to it after death. Imam Sadiq (a.s.) is reported to have said: "If you see it in Barzakh, you will say: This is the same person."

It means that it is similar in appearance to one's body in the world before death, but only materially. It is extremely pure and subtle. Allamah Majlisi says in Biharul Anwar: It is like angels and jinns in subtlety.

He also adds that what is mentioned in traditions about the amplitude of grave and the movement of the soul and its flying in space and visiting its relatives etc. all of it is related to this facsimile body.

Some researchers have likened the Barzakhi body to an image seen in a mirror; but it is not independent and is also imperceptible, whereas the Barzakhi body is supported by spirit and it possesses feelings and perception.

Question 43

Q.43: There are some polytheists who perform good deeds and charitable acts. Some may also make discoveries benefiting millions of people. Can such things decrease the punishment due to them?

A: Inventions and discoveries, which provide facilities to God 's servants, can have a lasting effect in the Hereafter only when their inventors or discoverers have faith and if they do not have anything except God 's pleasure in their view and if they do not desire their reward from anyone except Only One God. It is, therefore, obvious that one who denies the existence of God and does not believe in Hereafter and who never thought of this during his work, has, for him, the same reward or remuneration (worldly benefits) which he had in his mind like name and fame and plentiful rights in this world and all other material things.

It goes without saying that there are worldly and other-worldly effects of a deed, which are beneficial for men and even for animals. Sometimes such effects are astonishing, even if the doer of the good is a denier or a sinner. For example, if a denier or a sinner benefits God's creation, as its consequences, some calamities are averted from him or his wealth is increased or his lifespan is prolonged.

Even sometimes that good service to humanity results in a revolution in himself. He changes his belief positively, repents for his past disbelief and dies a faithful believer for a fruitful future life in the Hereafter. If he dies without adopting faith, his beneficence can earn hirn a decrease in his punishment in the Hereafter. It is mentioned about HatimTai , famous for his charity, and about Naushirvan, the Just that they are in Hell, but are not being burnt in Hellfire; on the contrary they are safe. However, the effects may vary in proportion to their beneficence.

Questoin 44

Q.44: What is 'agony of death' (Ghamaraat) and 'death pangs' (Sakaraat)? Are these conditions faced by those who die suddenly?

A: 'Death pangs' and 'agony of death ' are troubles and hardships faced at the time of death. In 'death pangs' the dying person becomes unconscious and utters meaningless words and makes meaningless and futile movements.

'Agony of death ' is when things worsen and the dying person becomes stunned, bewildered and stupefied. Those who die suddenly or accidentally are saved from 'death pangs ' yet, it is no secret that trial through 'death pangs ' is not an evidence of a bad death. Likewise dying with ease also is no proof of the good state of any person. There is no generalization in either case.

It is quite possible that a believer may be subjected to hardships of 'death pangs' so that he may become clean of his past sins. Similarly, it is also possible that a denier or a sinner may die a comfortable death as a reward of his good deeds in this world and so that he may not get any benefit in the Hereafter. (For further clarification please refer to Shaykh Sadooq 's Shiite Creed).

Notes

1. According to Islamic tenninology it is those who die before gaining maturity, hence cannot be blamed for not adopting Islam; or those who are mentally unbalanced to be able to get the message of Islam; or in some cases even some mature and sane people may not get the chance to know about Islam; in all these cases, divine justice demands that they cannot be considered at par along with other people in the matter of being Muslims.

2. Ziyarat Jamia

Exegesis (Tafsir) of verses of the Holy Quran

إِنَّا أَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ

"Surely We revealed it on the grand night. "(Al-Qadr, 97: 1)

Questoin 45

Q.45: Did the Holy Quran come down to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) in one single night or it was revealed in stages? Please explain.

A: The apparent meaning of the above-quoted verse and the verse:

شَهْرُ رَمَضَانَ الَّذِي أُنْزِلَ فِيهِ الْقُرْآنُ

''The month of Ramazan is that in which the Quran was revealed...” (Al-Baqarah 2: 1 85)

And the verse:

إِنَّا أَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةٍ مُبَارَكَةٍ

"Surely We revealed it on a blessed night...” (Ad- Dukhaa n 44:3)

. ..is that the Holy Quran was sent down as a whole to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) during the Night of Power (Shabe Qadr) in the holy month of Ramadan. But the apparent meaning of another holy verse:

وَقُرْآنًا فَرَقْنَاهُ لِتَقْرَأَهُ عَلَى النَّاسِ عَلَىٰ مُكْثٍ وَنَزَّلْنَاهُ تَنْزِيلًا

"And it is a Quran which We have revealed in portions so that you may read it to the people by slow degrees, and We have revealed it, revealing in portions. "(Al-lsra, 17: 106)

...is that the Holy Quran was revealed to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) in stages. According to an inordinate number of narrations it was revealed stage by stage in a period of twenty­ three years (period of the office of the Prophet). Apparently there seems to be contradiction between this verse and the verses mentioned earlier. Commentators have presented various explanations and the best of them being that which is narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) in the beginning; that the entire Quran came down to Baitul Maamoor from the source of revelation at one time and thereafter, as required by circumstances, angel Jibraeel brought the verses in stages to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) during a period of 23 years.

A researching commentator has mentioned the possibility that the Holy Quran, which was for the first time sent down to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) in one instance was not exactly in the form of words and text, which we see now. On the contrary, the truth of the Quran, understanding of which is above the perceptibility of common people, was put in the holy heart of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) at once and then, step by step, this truth was brought out through the tongue of the Prophet during a period of 23 years in form of Quranic letters and words (text). Witnesses in support of this probability have also quoted from the text of the Holy Quran. (Whoever desires may refer to volume 2 of Tafsir al-Mizan).

Question 46

Q.46: Why is the Holy Quran not compiled in order of its revelation?

A: Doubtlessly, in compiling verses of Quran, their position in time has not been considered. Verses revealed in Medina during the last period of the Prophet have become a part of chapters revealed earlier in Mecca and on the other hand, verses revealed in Mecca are included in Medinite Surahs and annulled verses are placed after the annulling etc. However this disorder has not harmed the beauty and eloquence of the scriptures and also not come in the way of its description of divine commandments and overall presentation.

وَقَتْلَهُمُ الْأَنْبِيَاءَ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ

''...and their killing the prophets unjustly ..." (Aale-‘Imraan, 3: 181)

Question 47

Q.47: The converse of this implies that prophets could be killed rightfully! ls suc:h a thing not against infallibility of prophets?

A : This question can be answered in two ways:

First: Killers can be of two kinds: Sometimes those who commit this crime consider themselves rightful according to their complete belief and relying on some doubts. Sometimes it also so happens that the killers know that this act is out of place and that it is without right, yet they kill a person on account of their enmity and wretchedness.

Obviously, the latter deed is doubtlessly worse and its punishment ought to be harsher. Those who killed messengers (a.s.) were of the second kind, that is, despite knowing that their act was a misdeed and misplaced, they committed the crime. In short, the killing of messengers was, besides being without right, even in the eyes of themselves it was wrong.

The adjective and its condition are of two types: essential adjective, which is present with the described thing in all conditions and disjointed adjective, which is sometimes present and sometimes not and when the adjective is used, but it does not apply to the described noun; it is there merely for emphasis and to make the matter clearer. There is no doubt that uunjustly'' is a permanent adjective for "their killing the prophets", it can never imply that killing of messengers could also be rightful. Also in accordance with rules of the science of principles, it is established that the adjective has no absolute meaning.

Question 48

ادْعُونِي أَسْتَجِبْ لَكُمْ

"Call upon Me, I will answer you.”(Al-Mo’min, 40:60)

Q.48: This verse is absolute and without any condition whereas it is mentioned in narrations that there are considerations and that in many cases supplication is not answered Please explain why it is so.

A: A divine promise cannot be broken. He gives to everyone who supplicated from Him everything as He has promised. But the condition is that it should be in the real interest of one who asks. This is because the answering by God is by way of mercy and kindness.

Granting a thing, which is not in the interest of 'asker', is against kindness and beneficence. It is established and known to all that man is too weak to find out his own benefit as he does not have the knowledge of every relevant matter, profits and harms or losses.

وَعَسَىٰ أَنْ تُحِبُّوا شَيْئًا وَهُوَ شَرٌّ لَكُمْ

"...and it may be that you love a thing while it is evil for you ...” (Al-Baqarah, 2:216)

So if the thing asked by Him is in his interest, He grants it to him. But, if it is not in his interest, He, instead of that, grants him a thing which would benefit him or He stores it for him in the future (life in Hereafter).

If someone says: "God surely grants the beneficial things to His servants, may they ask for it or not." We may say that there are two kinds of beneficial things: Some are inevitable and some depend on asking and praying for. Since finding them out is beyond man's capacity, one should pray for all known good things, because, if the thing asked for is dependable on supplication, it is granted. Otherwise if it was decreed, the supplicant gets the reward of reciting a supplication which makes one nearer to God. Thus it entitles one to more grace.

It must also be known that sometimes it also so happens that the supplication is answered, but with a delay. Consequently, due to needfulness, the person supplicates more and more. This also is a divine strategy whereby the person gets more and more from Almighty Allah. It is mentioned in Al-Kafi that Imam Baqir (a.s.) said:

"Whenever Almighty Allah likes the voice of His servant, He delays granting the desired thing so that he may supplicate to Him more and more."

Regarding what is mentioned in the question that 'despite fulfilling the required conditions, sometimes the supplication is not answered ', this statement is incorrect. What is required is fulfillment of conditions for supplication. Also very few supplications fulfill this requirement of maintaining all conditions. If there is such a supplication, it is very unlikely to remain unanswered. For example, the most essential condition which is usually disregarded is sincerity, that is, one who supplicates does not see the ability to answer the supplication in anyone, except Almighty Allah. He must be sure that there is no cause, which can bring him what he wants and hence his attention should always be on Only One God from the bottom of his heart. The holy verse says:

"Call on Me", that is Me and only Me, none else and also adds:

أُجِيبُ دَعْوَةَ الدَّاعِ إِذَا دَعَانِ

"...I answer the prayer of the suppliant when he calls on Me” (Al-Baqarah, 2:186)

This is the condition mentioned in the following verse:

أَمَّنْ يُجِيبُ الْمُضْطَرَّ إِذَا دَعَاهُ

"Or, Who answers the distressed one when he calls upon Him…” (An-Naml, 27:62)

That is, a condition in which one gets cut off from everyone and everything else other than Only One Allah and the state of unrest wherein one has no alternative, but to look at Only One God. Acceptance is promised to such a supplication.

Again, unrest is of two kinds:

l. Innate

2. Legislative

The innate is one wherein there is no apparent means and ways and the needy person is compelled to look at Only One God (the Creator of Causes), for example, a man drowning in the sea.

Legislative unrest is when a man is fully sure and has certainty about the truth that Only One God has total might and that nothing can be effective without His Will; that every cause is subject to His wish. This certainty overtakes every other thought and imagination without any superstition. Then in every situation he finds himself to be extremely in need of God and nothing else remains in his heart. Obviously such a state of mind and heart is so high that it is earnestly desired by great devoted people as mentioned in Imam Amirul Momineen 's 'Whispered prayer ' of Shaban (Munajaate Shabania):

"O Allah grant me the grace to cut off relations with this world and make me Yours."

That is why, Imam Sadiq (a.s.) replied to one who asked:

"Why our supplication are not answered?"

"Because you call One Whom you have not properly recognized."

This shows that supplications for which acceptance is promised are very few. Yet it goes without saying that though there are few supplications, which fulfill all conditions of acceptance, what is basically behind the promise is a vast door of God 's grace and kindness. The Almighty also most of the time deals mercifully and answers prayers even if they do not fulfill conditions. This sinful writer himself has experienced thousands of times that though his supplications were quite defective or without required conditions, the Merciful Lord granted what was asked from Him.

Question 49

Q.49: In verse 5 of Surah Nisa, God says: Take two, three or four wives. But if you fear that you will not be able to do justice, take only one. But in verse 129, He says: You will never be able to do justice between women. Apparently there is a contradiction between these two verses:

ۖفَانْكِحُوا مَا طَابَ لَكُمْ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ مَثْنَىٰ وَثُلَاثَ وَرُبَاعَ

فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا فَوَاحِدَةً

"...then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one..." (An-Nisa, 4:3)

ۖوَلَنْ تَسْتَطِيعُوا أَنْ تَعْدِلُوا بَيْنَ النِّسَاءِ وَلَوْ حَرَصْتُمْ

فَلَا تَمِيلُوا كُلَّ الْمَيْلِ

"And you have it not in your power to do justice between wives, even though you may wish (it), but be not disinclined (from one) with total disinclination ...” (An-Nisa, 4: 129)

Kindly explain, in this context, the difference between apparent justice and ideal justice.

A: The justice demanded in the first verse is a justice when one has more than one wife. It pertains to justice in their rights and maintenance of equality between them, because giving preference only to one becomes injustice to others. For example, if he has slept with one wife for one night, he must also sleep for one night with all others also. If he goes to bed with one for two nights he should also go bed with others also for two nights and so on.

Such justice must be maintained in giving maintenance to all wives. Given preference to one must not do injustice to others.

On the contrary it is desirable that such equality must also be shown in the matter of looking at them with equally smiling face. If the husband passed a night with one, he should be near her next morning also. There is no doubt that such justice which pertains to equality in rights,

is quite possible and practicable and hence it is commanded by God.

But the justice referred to in the other verse, which says: "You will not be able to do justice" and which is beyond man's control is a thing which pertains to heartfelt love and affection. The reason of saying thus is how can one love all wives equally when such a thing depends on heart's inclination, which is not under one's control; for example, beauty. The more beautiful one will naturally make one's heart incline to her more. Same is the case of conduct and behavior. One who is better in this respect will naturally hold more attraction.

It is mentioned in Al-Kafi that Ibne Abil Awja objected to Hisham Ibne Hakam saying: These two verses contradict one another. Hisham asked about it from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) and he replied: "The first verse is about food and the second is about love ."

In short, justice in this meaning of equality in love and affection is an uncontrollable thing. The Lord of the Universe says: "Do not show total disinclination..." Be not disinclined (from one) with total disinclination in such a manner that due to absence or shortage of inclination of heart, you may not show even the justice which you can, which is mentioned in the first verse. So do not behave in such a way with one that her condition may be like one who has been divorced and who can marry anyone else nor like the married one who should get her rights.

It is narrated that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) showed such a perfect and complete justice to his wives, especially in the matter of distribution between them. He used to say: "My God, this is my distribution, wherein I have done according to my ability in the matter of justice in companionship and maintenance. So please, do not hold me responsible in the matter which You own and which I do not possess", that is in the matter of natural inclination.

وَلَا تَكْتُمُوا الشَّهَادَةَ

"...and do not conceal testimony ..." (Al-Baqarah, 2:283)

Question 50

Q.50: The Holy Quran does not allow concealing of testimony and has made the testimony of two just witnesses an essential part of dispensing justice. But in case of adultery, it demands four witnesses. Why? If three persons testify and the fourth is not found, it (Quran) orders penalty to the said three. Does this command not compel hiding of testimony against the said verse? Does it not embolden people to commit adutery?

A: A case is established by the testimony of two just persons according to Islamic Shariah, but in the matter of adultery or sodomy, testimony of four persons is needed. This is an obligatory order full of wisdom, the strategies whereof are hidden from us. Perhaps it is because the Almighty Allah dislikes publicizing these two sins, because their open publicity is likely to encourage others as well as decrease the seriousness of these two greater sins.

Secondly, their exposure in public is against the virtue of modesty and self respect. It is mentioned traditions that the mdesty of God is greater than that of messengers and modesty of messengers is greater than that of the faithful.

As regards the problem of hiding testimony: It is obligatory to give witness and prohibited to hide it when establishment of truth depends on it and on condition that it should not harm one who testifies or believers in general; on the contrary even against whom testimony is given. For instance, one against whom a testimony is given is insolvent and the witness pays no attention to this and after establishment of truth, he wiII be arrested and imprisoned. In such case a witness cannot testify.

So if one wants to testify in a religious (Sharai) court against someone in case of adultery, he must first of all see whether there are three other just witnesses who had witnessed that heinous act and if they are prepared to testify. In that case the testimony is allowed. But if suppose there are no more than three witnesses and they testify according to Shariat rules, that case is not proved.

On the contrary the three would become liable for Qazaf.1 The reason is that they testified without legal proof: Since the sentence awarded to the three witnesses is from their own side, there is no room for objection. Now as mentioned in the question it is incorrect that this encourages adultery. On the contrary this discourages Qazaf so that people would be afrai d of accusing each other of adultery and thereby also realize the seriousness of this sin.

Question 51

Q.51: The Almighty Allah has at the end of Surah Luqman in Quran, reserved knowledge of the unseen only for Himself. But it is seen that some persons do give information of the unseen and it also proves to be absolutely true. Please remove the doubt in this regard.

A: Encompassing the entire knowledge of the seen and unseen throughout the universe is only for Almighty Allah, Who has neither a partner nor any like. Just as He is the Creator and controller of everything, only He encompasses everything and all information.

As for knowledge of all creation about the unseen, it is known through many narrations that some categories of knowledge of unseen are entirely and only with God and no one except Him knows about it, not even the nearest angels or messengers sent by Him. Perhaps it is in this category that lies information of reality and being of Almighty Allah, the Eternal, the Almighty. But except this, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and the Imams (a.s.) have knowledge of unseen to the extent God reveals it to them.

Therefrom what is meant by verses of Quran and narrations of Imam which say that knowledge of unseen is only with Allah and which is not with even prophets and Imams (a.s.) is His personal knowledge regarding unseen worlds. Whatever messengers and Imams know is taught to them by God through revelation. There is no doubt that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) and Imams did possess knowledge about a number of unseen matters many of which are recorded in books. But all of it was what Almighty Allah made them aware of.

Some other people also obtain knowledge of unseen, which they might reveal to others; some clever persons and astrologers forecast future happen ings and diviners conclude something through charms and ascetism; and there are some who show that they can control a jinn and claim that a friendly jinn gives them hidden information; it must be understood that none of them possess a road to the supernatural totally and that their information is but partial and that too not covering everything, but only a little about things to happen in this world.

Secondly, all their information is sketchy and partial. None is based on knowledge, research or investigation and which cannot be relied upon logically. If a doctor holds the hand of a patient and says something about future, it is more reliable compared to what the aforesaid fellows say. None of them has any solid basis, which can call for putting trust in them.On the contrary they themselves are not quite confident of it, all of which is based on conjecture.

Most of their forecasts are proved incorrect as mentioned in books. Even those who claim to have friendship with jinns would agree that their information is short, incomplete and insufficient. Many a time their untruth is exposed. For example one of them predicts the death of a person on the basis of his knowledge of circumstances. But he does not know that it will be delayed on account of his good deeds like charity, supplication or a good turn to relatives.

That is why Islamic Shariat has prohibited consulting those who claim to foretell the future. Islamic law does not allow anyone to be influenced by their forecasts. On the contrary religion commands putting entire trust in Almighty Allah and performing good deeds like supplication and charity etc.

Summarily, one who knows everything everywhere by his own personal knowledge is Only God. What information messengers and Imams have given about unseen is due to grace bestowed by God. As mentioned, none of the fortune-tellers have definite knowledge of things to happen. That some of what they say proves correct is merely by accident. It is therefore a fact that their statements contain more falsehood than truth.

It must also be remembered that most of what they say is based on guess work and not knowledge of unseen. It is mere superstition on which their so-called knowledge is based. Moreover what they say is mostly based on apparent causes.

Knowledge of unseen is only and only with God Almighty and with those messengers and Imams whom He is bestowed it by His grace. The above mentioned fortune-tellers cannot give the exact hour of any happening. For example, if they say that Zaid will die, they cannot say exactly at what time. Such exact and final and complete knowledge is only with Almighty Allah: Indeed the unseen is known only to Allah and there is no power or strength except by Allah.

Notes

1. Accusing a chaste person of adultery or sodomy.

Jurisprudence (Fiqh)

Question 52

Q.52: What is the difference between Nawafil (highly recommended) and Mustahabbat (recommended)? When are Nawafil of daily ritual prayers performed and when do they lapse?

A: Nawafil means deeds, which are desirable among non­ obligatory acts. In other words, one is allowed to leave them. Literally, Nawafil also means recommended acts with all their kinds. But in parlance of religious jurisprudents Nawafil are special non-obligatory recommended acts related to ritual prayers. Thus Nawafil means all voluntary ritual prayers and the most excellent of them is the Nawafil of daily ritual prayer. They are 34 units (Rakats): Eight units of Nafila Zuhr (Noon), four units of Nafila Asr (Afternoon), two units of Nafila Maghrib (evening), one unit of Nawafil lsha (night), eleven units of Midnight Prayer and two units of Nafila Fajr (morning).

Timings of Nawafil prayers: Nafila of Zuhr must be performed before the Zuhr prayer and its time begins from the beginning of Noon until the shadow of man (which appears at noon) becomes 2/7th of it.

For example, if the height of a man is seven feet, he may perform Nafila of Zuhr till his shadow becomes two feet. The Nafila of Asr should be performed before Asr prayer. Its time is upto the moment the shadow becomes its 4/7th

If one wants to perform it after the above mentioned time he should first perform Nafila Zuhr after the Zuhr prayer and then pray Nafila Asr after Asr prayer. Secondly, he must not make an intention of praying i n time or as a lapsed prayer (Qadha). On the basis of precaution, if he misses the same during the day and wants to perform it at night, he should make intention of lapsed prayer (Qadha).

The time limit of Nafila Maghrib is after Maghrib prayer and it lasts upto the moment when redness in the sky after sunset disappears. Thereafter it lapses (Qadha). The time of Nafila Isha is after Isha prayer and can be perfonned upto midnight. The Nafila Fajr is before Fajr prayer and its time is after the first dawn until appearance of redness in east. It is allowed to pray Nafila Fajr immediately after Nafila of Night prayer. The time of Nafila Fajr is from midnight to call for prayer (Adhaan) for Fajr prayer. One who fears that he will not wake in time is allowed to perform it before midnight.

Question 53

Q.53: There are varying narrations about Midnight Prayer, especially regarding Shaf Prayer and the matter of Chapter of Quran (Surah) and supplication (Qunut). What is the proper procedure?

A: Midnight Prayer consists of eight units (Rakats) with four salutations (Salaam), that is four prayers of two units each and the supplication (Qunut) is to be recited in the second unit of each prayer before bowing (Ruku). Details of Qunut and Surahs to be recited therein are mentioned in many books on this topic.

As for the Shaf Prayer: It consists of two units like other two-unit prayers. Yes, there is a difference of opinion about the Qunut before Ruku in its second unit. What is famous among scholars is that Qunut is recommended. It is mentioned in the report Abi Zahaak describing the way Imam Ridha’ (a.s.) performed the Midnight Prayer that the Imam, in the second unit, recited Qunut before Ruku.

But Abdullah bin Sinan quotes Imam Sadiq (a.s.) that: Qunut is recited in the third unit of Watr. So it is regarded as an emphasized recommended act that should not be missed; and that it deserves importance. Solitary Qunut is Witr prayer, which is regarded as the third unit. Summarily if this weak person is able, he does not miss even the Qunut of the second unit of Shaf, God Willing. But as regards the solitary Witr, the important ritual whereof is Qunut in which after recitation of Hamd and Surah, repentance (lstighfaar) should be recited seventy times saying: Astagh firullaah wa as aluhuttaubah = I seek forgiveness of Allah and ask repentance from Him.

It is mentioned in Faqeeh and Misbah Shaykh (r.a.) that Imam Sajjad (a.s.) used to reci te: Al Afw, three hundred times at dawn. Details of such supplications are available in books of supplications.

Question 54

Q.54: If an indebted person is asked by his creditor to repay the debt immediately and hence unable to perform ritual prayer in beginning time, can he offer it in the common time?

A: Whenever a duty-bound person is confronted by two obligatory duties and when one of the two is spacious and the other tight, doubtlessly, he must give preference to that which is tight and until he fulfils it, he should not engage in the other, which has scope. Since repaying of debt, when one is able to do it on demand of creditor is a straitened obligation, any laxity in it is unlawful.

As performance of ritual prayer at the earlier hour as well as during common period is spacious, if one does not repay the demanded debt before tightening up of prayer time, and begins his ritual prayer, he has sinned. In such a case he should, by way of precaution repeat his ritual prayer. Not only this, if one is engaged in ritual prayer in a spacious time and the creditor demands his money (which can be met by interrupting ritual prayer), the debtor should interrupt it and repay the debt immediately. If he does not, he has sinned, though his ritual prayer will be correct, yet there is precaution in repeating it.

Question 55

Q.55: A man bought clothes with unlawful money and considers that the money and the price thereof as a debt due to him on the owner of the dress and proposes to pay it up at ease. Can he, in such circumstances offer ritual prayer wearing that dress?

A: When a person buys something with illegal funds, the transaction is unlawful, and every such exchange is invalid. It remains a property of the owner and is not transferred to the buyer. But if one buys something in usual course and at the time of payment, pays from unlawful money, the deal is correct and the exchange is valid, but its responsibility is on the owner and he should pay the previous owner lawful money.

Question 56

Q.56: Apparently the philosophy behind shortened Prayer (Qasr) for a traveller is due to the hardships of the journey. But as obligatory precaution, it is ordered to perform both, which doubles or triples the hardship of a traveller. Kindly explain the cause of this.

A: The reply to this question depends on a brief preface. When the Almighty Allah commands something and it is proved as a divine order, from the aspect of reasoning that is, Quran, traditions, consensus and logic, it is acted upon by dutiful persons in such a manner that one is satisfied that one has done his duty. Such satisfaction is quite logical. However certainty or satisfaction of having fulfilled the duty is of two kinds:

1 - Detailed: When the duty-bound person can carry out the given orders as desired; for example, to perform ablution (Wudhu) with pure water to perform ritual prayer. One should be able to get or have pure water for ablution and then he should be certain that he has fulfilled all legal requirements and then offer ritual prayer. Thus he gets satisfaction of having performed his duty properly.

2 - Brief: It is when the duty-bound person does not have certainty that he has perfonned as ordered and detailed by the lawgiver. Hence he is compelled to repeat his performance to get the satisfaction of having performed the act correctly. For example, his water is available in two vessels and he knows that one of the two is pure and the other is mixed but is not sure which is which. So he performs ablution with both waters, so that he may summarily be certain that he has done the duty properly. Such repetition is quite logical. It is an effort to get satisfaction and not a divine order so that someone may ask how the Altnighty Allah orders repetition.

After this preface we can say that divine command to shorten ritual prayer and leaving fast during travel has some fixed conditions. Thus when a duty bound person is sure that conditions have been fulfilled, he shortens his ritual prayer and is satisfied that he has done his duty. But when there is any doubt and he does not get satisfaction, if he shortens ritual prayer because of some doubt whether or not there were conditions calling for such shortening; likewise if he does not get satisfaction even if he performs it (ritual prayer) fully as there might have been conditions calling for the same. So logic demands that he should perform both fully and in short, so that he may get certainty of having done his duty properly. Such compulsive joining of the two (short and full) is a demand of reason in following divine commands. It is not an order of religion as explained earlier.

In other words, such repetition is not commanded by religion so that someone may say that it is against the philosophy of shortening prayer during a journey. Rather it is logic, which calls for such repetition to obtain certainty and satisfaction that the needful is done as required.

Question 57

Q.57: In Polar Regions, where hunran life is possible, both day and night are of six months duration. How should a Muslim perform his daily ritual prayer in those regions?

A: According to available information, human habitation is not feasible in such areas. However, if a Muslim anyhow reaches there where it is not possible to know the timing of daily ritual prayer and the period of the holy month of Ramadan, both of which are obligatory for every M uslim, he must migrate from such place. Migration of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w. s.) from his own native place shows the way. Accordingly if a Muslim happens to be in infidel areas, where he cannot fulfill his religious duties, he is duty-bound to leave that place and migrate elsewhere where he can abide by his religious obligations. If he does not do so, he commits a Greater Sin.

Allamah Majlisi (r.a.) has quoted from Muntaha that when the following verse was revealed:

افَتُهَاجِرُوا فِيهَأَلَمْ تَكُنْ أَرْضُ اللَّهِ وَاسِعَةً

"Was not Allah's earth spacious, so that you should have migrated therein? "(An-Nisa, 4:97)

The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) made migration obligatory for those suppressed from expressing their religious obligations.

If one is compelled to remain in such areas and is not able to migrate, he may refer to the timings of daily ritual prayer and Ramadan fasts in cities situated in such regions and act according to what is being done there.

The late Sayyid has also mentioned in Risalah Urwathul Wuthqa that knowing required timings from such cities is quite easy through clocks, telegraph and radio etc.

Also though the rising and setting of sun is not visible in the said regions, its traces can be known at night time. The maximum rising point of sun can be regarded as noon and the least can be taken as midnight and then prayer timings can be calculated accordingly.

Question 58

Q.58: Is the buying and selling of slaves lawful in this age also? ls it allowed to apprehend people from Africa etc. and sell them in other places?

Freeing of slaves as expiation for lapsed fasts is ordered in the Holy Quran. If this order is permanent, it has become impracticable today.

A: Yes, it is permissible for a Muslim to apprehend an original disbeliever in any way and from anywhere and enslave him provided he is not under treaty or responsibility of any Muslim (Zimmi). After that his buying and selling is allowed.

As for the obligation of freeing a slave as expiation in times like this when no slave is available, since slavery is banned, the obligation of freeing of slaves too has been dropped due to impracticabi lity. Its substitute is also not available and in this matter there is no difference between optional expiation and total expiation.

Wisdom behind slave-freeing in Islam

The holy religion of Islam is attacked with regard to the matter of slavery. In this connection they target this Quranic command of freeing of slaves. As these attacks are likely to affect the minds of some unaware people, here we briefly hint at this order of freeing slaves. There is no doubt that slavery is not especially related to Islam. It was in vogue in all ages among all communities and regions of the world.

Every community had its own manner of slavery and dealings in slaves. The behavior of some communities was extremely pitiful, especially in Europe where it was very tragic. They dealt and behaved with their slave folks extremely harshly. [Anyone who wants to know the condition of slaves in Europe and America and other countries may refer to Dairatul Maarif (encyclopedia)].

In short, the holy religion of Islam only allowed this matter, which was in vogue in human beings, but on the condition that the slave should be a disbeliever and he or she also must not be under the protection of Muslims. In fact enslaving a disbeliever is a kind of great service to all humanity, because through it the disbeliever comes in touch with Muslims and gets awareness about the religion of Islam.

Thereby, after sometime, the human society gets a God­ fearing and righteous person, especially when Islamic laws of dealing with slaves are followed properly (as will be mentioned). Stories of slaves who reached high ranks in spiritualism and righteousness are already recorded in books of history. Some slaves due to their high intelligence and awareness have been influential elements in society; others even reached the position of ministership and kingship.

Islamic laws about slaves: It is known to all who are aware of laws of Islam, how much Islam has emphasized freeing of slaves. For this purpose Islam has framed compulsory rules like expiation of murder and missing of Ramadan fasts etc. through emancipating slaves. Many other recommendations are made regarding slaves.

As regards their rights, the Holy Quran, along with saying:

وَبِالْوَالِدَيْنِ إِحْسَانًا

"...and show kindness to your parents ..." (Al-Anam, 6: 151)

says:

وَمَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ

"...and those whom your right hands possess ...” (An-N isa, 4:36)

. .which means behave nicely with slaves and handmaids. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) as well as Amirul Momineen (a.s.) have also mentioned in their wills: "You must take care of two types of the weak: women folk and slaves."

Question 59

Q.59: What is the difference between Waleema dinner and Keerah dinner? And what is 'Habooh'?

A: Waleema dinner means giving a feast. It is of several kinds and Keerah dinner is a sort of Waleema. It pertains to purchasing of a house or laying foundation of a new house. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) is reported to have said that Waleema should be given in following cases:

I. Marriage 2. Child birth 3. Circumcision 4. Buying a house and 5. After returning from Hajj1 .

It is mentioned in another tradition that in event of buying a house Waleema may be arranged and for house building a fat sheep may be slaughtered and fed to the poor.2

Habooh ' means those specific things which the eldest son inherits from his father. They are the father's clothes, finger ring, sword and his copy of the Holy Quran. These things are to be given to the son. In case of more than one son, to the eldest one, provided that these are not the only things left by the late father, and that he is not indebted to the extent of these things.

Question 60

Q.60: Please define dissimulation (Taqayyah). Also explain how it applies to Prophet, Imams and Shias?

A: Explaining dissimulation, Shaykh Ansari (r.a.) says: It is protecting oneself from a harm that can be inflicted by others by agreeing with them about a word or a deed, which is against truth.

Shaheed Awwal (r.a.) has, in Qawaid, divided dissimulation (Taqayyah) into five kinds:

obligatory (Wajib), unlawful (Haraam), recommended (Mustahab), detestable (Makrooh) and permissible (Mubah).

Likewise, Shaykh (r.a.) has, in Risala Taqayyah described these five kinds and mentioned their conditions as under:

Obligatory dissimulation: A harm which should compulsorily be removed through dissimulation. For example, one saves or protects his own life or life of someone else or saves some wealth or property, which must be protected. Thus dissimulation becomes compulsory when there is certainty or fear of aforesaid harm or loss to one' self or to another believer.

Recommended dissimulation: When there is no definite and practical fear of loss or harm but there is likelihood of such harm in future. For example, giving up some social manners with non-Shias in their habitations and non-attendance of their gatherings whereby there may be any fear of harm from them.

Moreover dissimulation is recommended when there is a likelihood of an easy or tolerable harm or loss.

Also dissimulation is recommended by giving up some recommended acts, which are not recommended in view of Sunnis. For example, not reciting some parts of call for prayer (Adhaan) or not prostrating at a holy shrine when they regard it as an innovation and unlawful act as a result of which harm or loss may come to oneself or to another believer. Giving up such rituals becomes obligatory and hence dissimu lation in such circumstances is also of the first kind, that is, obligatory dissimulation.

Detestable dissimulation: It is in the matter of recommended acts without any fear of harm from the enemy at presen t or in future and when one fears that if he leaves those recommended acts, he will become doubtful in the eyes of people and they will imagine that those things are not recommended.

It is also considered detestable dissimulation when one has to suffer harm due to doing things which are highly preferable. For example, a man of repute in society is compelled to utter words of disbelief or to use bad words for Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). In such circumstances though, in order to save life, dissimulation is allowed, it is indeed detestable. Like Ammar who resorted to dissimulation. And if one discards dissimulation and expresses truth (like Mitham Tammar) it would be excellent and if he, because of it, gets killed, he would be considered a martyr. But one who is not a distinguished person in society is allowed to practice dissimulation, if he is compelled. It means that he can either resort to it or leave it even at the risk of getting killed.

Unlawful dissimulation: It is killing a Muslim to save oneself or others from harm: and it is narrated from Imam Ja 'far Sadiq (a.s.) that he said: "Verily dissimulation is provided to stop bloodshed. Therefore, if dissimulation results in bloodshed of innocent oppressed, it is not dissimulation."3

Dissimulation of Prophet or Imam: Dissimulation is not allowed for a prophet or an Imam, be it for protecting self or the community for hrm. He cannot speak or do anything against truth, because prophet and Imams are guides who show the way to truth, whereas dissimulation hides truth and conceals facts. Of course when there is a very serious danger, dissimulation becomes permissible for them also. Rather it becomes compulsory, provided that, they have, before resorting to dissimulation, already made truth clear for all or they (Prophet or Imam)

point out (indirectly) toward truth or if, after passing away of danger, express the truth openly.

Briefly speaking, they do not leave people in doubt. If he (Prophet or Imam) reverts after the instance demanding dissimulation, it shows that this dissimulation was not beyond the above mentioned three kinds of dissimulation and especially if they have expressed the fact and truth before, during or after their resorting to dissimulation.

Question 61

لَيْلَةُ الْقَدْرِ خَيْرٌ مِنْ أَلْفِ شَهْرٍ

"Thie grand night is better than a thousand months.” (Al-Qadr, 97:3)

Q.61: If Friday eve is the 23'd eve of Ramadan, due to difference of horizon, it is possible that in the farthest east Thursday eve is the 24'" eve of Ramadan and in the farthest west, is Saturday or Sunday eve. In such circumstances which night will be regarded as the exact Lailatul Qadr?

A: The reply to this question requires a brief introduction and it is that the first night of the month is when at the time of sunset, the moon comes out from below the horizon. And if there is obstruction of cloud, steam and dust etc and when it is possible to see the moon. Thus whenever moon is sighted in a town, would it become necessary for the inhabitants of other towns where the moon has not been sighted to consider it as first of the month?

There is no doubt that if some towns are near to it or far away, but which share the horizon. it will be considered as the first eve of the month. Because sighting of moon would have been proved for those towns as well, because the horizon of those towns is same as the horizon of places where moon is sighted. And the moon could have been seen, but some obstruction like clouds, dust etc. obstructed its sighting.

There is consensus of all Imamiyah jurists on this point. But towns which are far away and whose horizons are different, regarding them most jurists are of the opinion that the first of the month is not proved from Islamic Shariah for them. If it is the first eve of month of Ramadhan, it is not obligatory for them to fast on the following day. If it is the first eve of Shawwal, the following day is not Eidul Fitr for them.

On the contrary, it is obligatory for them to keep a fast on that day. But some jurists have quoted from Allamah Hilli's Tadkiratul Fuqaha as follows: There is no difference between the near and remote places. If the moon is sighted in one town, it will prove the first of the month for all towns. And he has presented the statement of Sahih lbne Hisham as proof: "From Abi Abdullah (a.s.) that he said: If a person, not sighting the moon kept 29 fasts of Ramadhan and after that it is proved beyond any doubt that in one town people had fasted for thirty days, he will have to make up for one fast that he had missed.''

If inhabitants of another place testify that moon is sighted and that night they did not fast as it was a doubtful night, they should make up for it later on.The authors of Jawahir Mustanad and Mustamasik have also adopted the same view.

Therefore the evidence of Sahih lbne Hisham and Mausiq Basari as some jurists have ruled that if moon is sighted in a town, it will be considered as first of the month in all places. And after the passage of twenty-three nights, the whole night should be spent in worship to gain the excellence of the Night of Power (Shabe Qadr). It is so because on the basis of strong probability, it is the Night of Power (Shabe Qadr). Collectively it is the 23rd eve about which there is strong possibility that it is the Night of Power (Shabe Qadr), is in fact not more than one.

But since most jurists have considered the traditional report of lbne Hisham to be conditional regarding places, which are near or far, but which share the same horizon; that is sighting of the moon in one place does not mean that it should be declared as first of the month for places which do not share the same horizon. On the contrary this law applies only to the places close to it, or towns which share the same horizon.

Thus one who intends to gain the excellence of the Night of Power (Shabe Qadr) should observe precaution. That is if the moon has been sighted in his town or the town which is same from the aspect of the horizon, he must spend the whole night in worship on the 23rd eve. In the same way, in places which have different horizon, in those places also, the nights should be spent in worship.

For example, a person who depending on the sighting of moon in his town, according to which it is the 23rd eve, is a Saturday and another place, which is out of horizon, there the moon had been sighted the previous night; in that case the 23rd will be Friday eve and he should worship on both (Friday and Saturday) nights, all the night long, so that he can really earn the true rewards of the Night of Power (Shahe Qadr).

It is so because the traditional reports of Sahih Hisham and Mausiq Basri imply that the real Night of Power (Shabe Qadr) is not more than one night and it is the 23rd night. But scholars are of the view that since there is difference of horizon between different places, one who really wants to earn the rewards of the true Night of Power (Shabe Qadr) should pray both nights.

If someone poses the question that due to the rising and setting of sun there is difference between places; for example there is night in some places and at the same time there is day in other places; the reply to this is that the apparent tenor of the verse is that for every place the Night of Power (Shabe Qadr) is there from beginning of night upto dawn. Therefore Night of Power (Shabe Qadr) will be of twenty-four hours duration, from the aspect of difference of

places. That is why it has come down in reliable traditions that the day of Qadr is also like Night of Power (Shabe Qadr), and perhaps it is so because of this. It is possible that one city

is having the day of Qadr and at the same time another city is passing through Night of Power (Shabe Qadr). Therefore during the period of twenty-four hours, the angels and spirit continue to descend and other effects also linger, but this will apply to every place only from sunset to dawn.

Question 62

Q.62: Why children born out of wedlock do not inherit?

A: It is an established religious law that a person born out of wedlock does not inherit from the adulterer parents or their relatives nor anyone is allowed to inherit from him or her. If such a person dies and leaves wealth or property; that property is regarded as that of one who died heirless. The matter has to be referred to the Imam or his deputy.

It is so because inheritance depends on true and normal lineage and an illegitimate born does not have such lineage and an embryo resulting from adultery does not commands any honor or respect. Yes, it can be derived from some narrations that it is recommended to will by way of mercy (not as a right), that he or she may be given some things. It i s mentioned in Al- Kafi that a man from Ansar group approached Imam Muhamm al Baqir (a.s.) and said: "I saw my slave committing adultery with my slave girl and impregnating her; she delivered a female child after nine months." The Holy Imam said: "Take care of that girl child and do not sell her away; keep her with you till she is no more or some way is opened for her. When the time of your death approaches, make a will that your wealth should be spent on her."

Also if an illegitimate born was to inherit property, firstly: adultery would be advertised and false testimony will become customary; and secondly it will open ways of false testimony by unscrupulous person to relate illegitimate borns to wealthy persons and thus extort money fronm them.

Question 63

Q.63: Are Jews and Christians of today by nature anti in essence impure or their impurity is due to their not refraining from dirty things? And is the group called Kalimiyan, who believe that God has a body or who call Uzair a son of God and a group, who like Christians say that Isa (a.s.) is God or God's son, are disbelievers impure in essence?

A: Most jurisprudents - may Allah be pleased with them - believe that impurity of Jews and Christians is innate, whi le others are of the view that their purity is not as per nature but it is because of eating and drinking dirty things like pork and wine etc.

As the wider description of this problem requires going deep into the claims of both parties and to conduct research therein, it would require a lot of time and hence I beg pardon.

Question 64

Q.64: ls vow (Nazr) allowed in all cases or only when the intention of the concerned person is known?

A: The intention of a person behind the vow should be in accordance with Islamic Shariat. It should be to carry out an obligatory or a recommended deed or to refrain from prohibited or detestable actions. In other words, the intention must be worship or obedience of Allah by means which can bring one nearer to Allah.

Question 65

Q.65: Sperm of a man who died a hundred years ago was preserved through chemicals and then subsequently introduced into the womb of a fertile spinster. Is the child born through this illegitimate?

A: There is no doubt that such a child is illegitimate.

Notes

1. Maniul Akhbar, pg 272

2. Maniul Akhbar, pg 272

3. Wasailush Shia. Vol. 1 1 , Pg. 483, Chapter 31 , Tradition no. I Surah Qadr 97:3

Miscellaneous Questions

Question 66

Q.66: Quran has challenged that you will not be able to bring even one verse like it. What do you say about Surah Wilayat regarding which it is claimed that since it was revealed in praise of Amirul Momineen (a.s.), they have removed it from Quran? Is it the word of Allah?

A: No doubt, the so-called Surah Wilayat is forged by some misled ignorant person and the one who committed this mischief has mixed some Quran verses with his home-made statements in a very awkward way making up about 25 verses and then named the collection as Surah Wilayat.

As regards the invalidation of this fictitious Surah, firstly the author of Faslul Khitab, after quoting it from Dabistanul Mazahib says:

Any Surah by this name is never found in any Shia books. One wonders how the author of Dabistanul Mazahib brought it and from where?"

Secondly: Anyone having sound sense can understand the fictitiousness of this Surah, because it bears no similarity with the style of Quran, its eloquence, harmony and diction. On the contrary it has a disgusting and ugly diction and wording.

Thirdly: This forged matter contains many grammatical errors, which anyone who knows Arabic grammar can find out easily. One of the clearest errors in it is the verse:

"And chosen from angels and appointed as believers, they are in his creation."

In this group of three phrases: firstly, they are totally unrelated with one another and their make up has nothing to do with one another and secondly, each phrase is a complete sentence but incomplete in sense.

About the first phrase, it can be asked: What is chosen from angels? In the second, what has been appointed as believers? In the third, to whom does the pronoun of 'they' points out? And

what does this incomplete sentence convey?

Another mistake is the sentence: "Like the one who is faithful to promise made to you. Verily I reward them with Paradise."

Here it should be asked: What is the like of faithful mentioned in the beginning of this sentence?

There are several mistakes in other verses as well and the framer of these sentences should be asked about the meaning of some key words and use of pronouns.

The late Aashtiyani (r.a.) writes in the margins of Rasail: "Doubtlessly this Surah is not from the Holy Quran, because anyone who knows Arabic grammar can bring its like easily. Also a scholar well versed with Arabic can never use such unrelated and meaningless words and sentences. Elocution and artistic language is much higher, it is just hotchpotch of words and does not make any sense and its beginning has no relevance with its end!''

Question 67

Q.67: What is studied under the following sciences: Rational science (Maaqool), Textual science (Manqool), Principles of jurisprudence (UsooleFiqh), Rules and regulations (Qawaid), Jurisprudence (Fiqh), Scholasticism (Kalaam), Logic (Mantiq), Eloquence (Maaniye Bayaan) and Wisdom (Hikmat)?

Rational science (Maaqool): In this field rational judgments are discussed and the way of proving them is also pure reason.

Textual science (Manqool): In this science the subject of discussion are commands of Islamic Shariat through Quran and Prophetic Sunnah or traditions.

In other words, the former discusses reasonings whereas the latter studies the text of the Quran and Prophetic Sunnah or traditions.

Principles of jurisprudence (Usoole Fiqh): Fundamentals of Jurisprudence are studied under this science.

Rules and regulations (Qawaid): It deals with derivation of rules of jurisprudence. This is impossible without knowing rules of Shariat through four mediums: Quran, traditions, consensus and reason.

Jurisprudence (Fiqh): It is a science wherein overall commands of Islamic Shariat are discussed viz. obligations, prohibitions, recommendations, detestations and permissions on the basis of the above sources.

Scholasticism (Kalaam): In this science is studied the process of proving religious beliefs on the basis of reasonings and proofs to remove doubts and uncertainties. (Religious beliefs imply knowledge about God, His attributes, names and deeds and the knowledge of prophethood/messengership (Nubuwwat), leadership (Imamate), Hereafter (Maad) and their branches.

Logic (Mantiq): It is the science that teaches rules to protect thoughts from errors and doubts. In other words, logic is the criterion to discriminate correct from incorrect in all rational laws.

Eloquence (Maaniye Bayaan): It i s the science related to clarity and lucidity in speech.

Wisdom (Hikmat): It is the knowledge and circumstances of all existing things: abstract, material, essence and variations and their kinds.

Question 68

Q.68: It is said that on ninth Moharram Imam Husain (a.s.) and his honorable companions were under siege. Then how could Habib bin Mazahir and Muslim bin Awsaja (a.s.) join the Imam under the strict surveilance of the army?

In a narration from Princess Sakina (s.a.) it is mentioned that on Ashura eve, His Eminence, Husain (a.s.) gave a speech in which he informed about his own martyrdom as well as that of his companions. Some of his men left saying goodbye and some without it. This narration also does not prove their being under siege.

Moreover, if the departure of his men was without any hurdle, why did the Imam not send his family members who desired to go to Medina with them? Of course, his own going away could he construed as flight, but what prevented him from sending away his family members when he was certain his and his companions' martyrdom and captivity of his household?

A: As regards the arrival of Habib and Muslim, it is recorded in books of Kerbala tragedy that these two great personages escaped from Kufa with much difficulty. They hid in trenches during daytime and traveled at night perilously arriving in Kerbala on the seventh or eighth of Muharram.

As for going away of some companions of Imam (a.s.) during the night of Ashura is concerned, it does not conflict with their being under siege, because in a big and vast desert having some hills and depressions, fleeing of some of them individually - not together - in the darkness is possible. They could escape surreptiously and it was also possible for them to mix

up with the army of opponents and then escape.

But as regards why Imam Husain (a.s.) did not send his family members along with deserters:

Firstly: Taking the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) along to Kerbala was due to an exigency and an obligation that was later exposed by history and their capture.

Secondly: It is obvious that when fleeing of an individual was not easy, it would have been far more hazardous to be accompanied by women and children. They could have been caught en route.

We may also say: Even if it were possible and easy, Imam Husain (a.s.) who is full of self-respect, would have never considered it proper to send his family members with those who had no faith in his religion and who had no virtue like faithfulness, sincerity and loyalty.

Those who deserted the Holy Imam (a.s.) in Kerbala on the eve of Ashura were worldly minded materialists, weak in keeping the covenant, feeble in faith or faithless and that is why Princess Sakina (a.s.) says: When they left my holy father alone and went away in tens and twenties and when none but only seventy-one remained, I began to weep saying:

"O Allah, indeed they have betrayed us! So make them account for it and do not answer their supplications, make poverty dominate them and do not grant them the intercession of my grandfather on Judgment Day."

Question 69

Q.69: How many types of relationships does the soul have with the body and how does it get detached from it in every stage?

A: Among relations of soul and body is the relation of nurturing. Lord Almighty has made soul as the nurturer. The meaning of nurturing is to carry something to its expected perfection. In other words, discretions of soul over the body are of two kinds:

First: Discretions which are natural, involuntaty and original like breathing and digestion.

Second: Voluntary functions like the perception of five senses and all other things, which the soul does in the body intentionally. In the state of dream, only the first kind remains, but not the second kind, however in death, both kinds of control and functions end.

Likewise, the soul, by the permission of Allah, carries away every part or organ of the body to perfection that is expected from it (organ).

Among all relations is relationship of determination (Ilaaqa Tadbeer) which means the mechanism of nourishment and growth and its branches include reproduction and understanding (intelligence) and the faculty of intention. All these are according to the direction of the soul with Allah's consent in such a manner that if a thorn or needle pricks a foot, man at once rushes to defend.

From the amazing things of the soul is that other engagements do not stop it from functioning in a matter. It goes on functioning simultaneously with hundreds of other engagements in a split second. For example, at one and the same time, the eye sees, the ear hears, the tongue talks, the nose smells, the mouth tastes, hand and feet move, the stomach digests and all go on without hindrance!

Then we have the relationship of rulership (llaaqa Hukumat), which means that soul is the ruler in the kingdom of body. All physical organs are subject to its command and they carry out its orders without any delay. When the soul wants, the tongue moves; the eye opens or closes depending on its intention to see or not to see. Of course when an organ falls ill, it fails to obey the soul and at the time of death all physical organs leave the soul's obedience.

Question 70

Q.70: What kinds of dreams can be called true and which can be called as false or muddled dreams?

A: Dreams are of two kinds: divinely inspired (Rahmani)

and muddled dreams (Azghaasul Ahlaam).

Divinely inspired (Rahmani) are dreams from the Lord of the worlds; meanings are sent down to the soul during sleep. It also is of two types: One of them does not need any interpretation and it is when the matter is as shown in the dream. Another kind is when it requires interpretation. For example, milk is likened to something very good. Getting milk is interpreted as getting nourishment, because food is to the body just as knowledge is to the soul.

Muddled dreams (Azghaasul Ahlaam) are also of three kinds, because their aim is either satanic thoughts, to hurt and frighten the dreamer or lure him to indulge in evils prohibited by religion or thirdly it might reflect the thoughts already in the mind of the dreamer. For example, he fights in dream with one of his enemies.

It is also possible that such dreams are due to excessive mucus like yellow bile, black bile, phlegm or blood. For example, if the yellow bile is in excess, the dreamer sees yellow color or tastes bitter food or hears thunderbolt, because yellow bile is hot and bitter. If one has excessive black bile, he sees burning things or black colors or bitter food articles. If one has excessive phlegm his vision includes white colors, water, rain and ice. One, having excessive blood dreams of crimeson colors, sweet eatables and other joyful things.

The method of interpreting dreams is that first one should examine ones own condition. If one was dreaming in a state of moderation, it shows that it was not due to excessive fluids. Then he should think about his state before going to bed. If he finds that the dream is not connected with anything that was present before going to bed, one can be sure that it is a Rahmani dream.

As for knowing the interpretation of Rahmani dreams, one method is to refer to numerous traditions of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) in this regard, some of which are mentioned in Darus Salaam of late Haji Noori and also in Vol.14 of Biharul Anwar. Some of them suggest referring to verses of Quran. For example, if one dreams of proclaiming the call for prayer (Adhaan), it is a Rahmani dream and that the dreamer would perform Hajj in accordance with the wordings of the following verse:

وَأَذِّنْ فِي النَّاسِ بِالْحَجِّ

"And proclaim (Adhin) among men the Pilgrimage ..." (Al-Hajj, 22:27)

In case he is to be a righteous person it would in accordance with the meaning of the rope of covenant:

وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ

"And hold fast by the covenant of Allah. " (Aal-‘Imraan, 3:103)

Dry wood is interpreted as hypocrisy:

كَأَنَّهُمْ خُشُبٌ مُسَنَّدَةٌ

"(They are) as if they were big pieces of' wood clad with garments.”(Al-Munaafiqoon, 63:4)

Stone is interpreted as the hardness of the heart:

فَهِيَ كَالْحِجَارَةِ

"So that they were like rocks...” (Al-Baqarah, 2:74)

Eating of carrion is interpreted as back-biting:

أَيُحِبُّ أَحَدُكُمْ أَنْ يَأْكُلَ لَحْمَ أَخِيهِ مَيْتًا

"Does one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother?” (Al-Hujuraat, 49:12)

Dress and egg are interpreted as women:

هُنَّ لِبَاسٌ لَكُمْ

"... they are an apparel for you ...” (Al-Baqarah, 2:187)

كَأَنَّهُنَّ بَيْضٌ مَكْنُونٌ

"As if they were eggs care/111/y protected. " ( As-Saffat, 37:49)

Some interpretations are based on names and their meanings. For example, one sees in dream someone named Rashid. This can be a hint to Rushd and Hidayat (goodness and guidance). If one's name is Saalim it can be a sign of safety and security.

Then there are interpretations based on reference to ethereal sphere (Aalame Malakoot) and realities, secrets and sciences of unseen. For example, if one sees himself dead it may be interpreted to mean a lengthy life, because worldly life with reference to life after death is in fact death. Due to dearth of what the soul likes and one's remaining enveloped in worldly engagements, the real life is life after death (which is endless).

Also for example, if one envisions that he is a bridegroom; it may be interpreted to mean that his death is near because, death for a faithful believer is his first marriage as mentioned in narrations that after questioning in grave a righteous believer is told: "Now go to sleep happily like a bride in her chamber."

It goes without saying that what has been mentioned above is by way of a general statement, which cannot be applied in each and every case except for one whom Almighty Allah has granted light (Noor) with which he sees and concludes; and this light is compared to instinct.

Question 71

Q.71: What is the legal view regarding sneezing? Does it reaily merit delaying something if tlie person in question suddenly sneezes? Explain good omen (Tafaul) and bad omen (Tatayyur)?

A: Although it is popular belief that if a person happens to sneeze while performing a particular task, he or she must delay it for sometime in order to avoid its evil effects; nothing of this sort is mentioned in traditional reports. On the contrary, it is mentioned in some traditions that sneeze is evidence of veracity of ones statement. And if he or she sneezes twice, it would imply that the statement has been verified twice. It is also mentioned in traditions that sneeze of a patient is evidence of his recovery and that he will be safe from death for three or seven days. It i s narrated from the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) that sneezing is beneficial to the whole body with the condition that it should not be more than three times; if it exceeds this, it should be construed as illness.

As for Tafaul (good omen): It is when a person named Saalim, Nasrullah or Fathullah enters, it creates hope for success and health in one who takes it to be a good omen.

Tatayyur (bad omen) is contrary to it. That is taking a bad omen from seeing or hearing something. For example, suppose perching of an owl on the roof or to see someone with an unlucky appearance in the beginning of the day or the beginning of the journey. But with regard to this, traditional reports say that taking good omen (Tafaul) is recommended and taking a bad omen (Tatayyur) is detestable (Makruh). And the secret of goodness of taking a good omen is that man continues to repose hope in mercy and beneficence of Almighty Allah, and that is why the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) said: The best deed of my Ummah is to hope for relief (Faraj) of Allah.1 On the contrary, taking a bad omen does not imply reposing hope in mercy of Almighty Allah; it is an evil anticipation and waiting for a calamity.

Effectiveness of good omen (Tajaul) and bad omen (Tatayyur)

Since good omen (Tafaul) depends on mercy and beneficence of Almighty Allah, it is effective, because Allah does not disappoint anyone who reposes hope in Him. Therefore

He says: "I am near the good expectation of My believer servant."2

But bad omen (Tatayyur) i s effective only when the concerned person accords importance to it and is more in anticipation of a calamity. If he does not pay any attention to it, and trusts his Lord, it will have no evil effect. Thus it i s narrated from the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) that: “The penalty of bad omen (Tatayyur) is to repose trust in Almighty Allah."3

In Al-Kafi , it is narrated from Imam Ja'far Sadiq (a.s.) that the effect of bad omen (Tatayyur) depends on circumstances of the concerned person. If he takes it lightly without paying undue importance to it and hopes in Almighty Allah, it will not have any evil effect. But if he accords importance to i t, he wou ld definitely be involved in problems.4

Question 72

Q.72: In the blessed chapter of Surah Yasin, verse 60, there is a word of 'Ahad' (to charge) which consists of three guttural letters producing sharp sounds from the throat one after another. It seems to be against diction and literary eloquence. Please comment.

A : Among the conditions of eloquence of a word is that it should not have cacophony; that is it must not be difficult to pronounce; on the contrary it should be easy to utter. But the discernment of this condition is related to correct taste. It has nothing to do with outlets from which it comes out or with their nearness or distance from one another. It is possible for an eloquent word to be pronounced from adjacent outlets or even from one and same source and hence its pronunciation may be easy. On the other hand, it is also possible that outlets of the word may be different (for every letter) and yet its pronunciation may be easy.

Furthermore, right taste and good conscience testify that pronunciation of 'Ahad ' is not difficult at all. It can be voiced quite easily. In fact, in Arabic language, there is no other word having the meaning of Ahad ' (to charge), which is more eloquent than it.

Question 73

Q.73: It is mentionetd in certain traditions thtat performance of some acts, prayers or supplications qualifies one for reward of a martyr, emancipating a slave or performing Jihad in way of Allah. Please explain how it is possible to earn a reward of one who has given up his life in the way of Allah?

A: Many traditions reported from Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) and Holy Imams (a.s.) through Shia and Sunni channels speak of divine rewards earned through perfoming recommended acts, none of which can be denied or rejected. Therefore such reports encourage believers to perform more and more such acts and earn divine rewards and it is assured that they will become eligible for such rewards.

Especially, if one performs an act after having heard about the tradition that mentions its reward, even if Prophet or Imams have not made such a statement. Hence such persons gain rewards and salvation. But there are some who after hearing such reports consider them incredible; on the contrary even dare to reject them, even though thousands of authentic reports are recorded on this topic in Shia and Sunni books. Some even ridicule such reports due to their ignorance about their meaning. Therefore we mention some replies so that it may prevent them from such a course of action and that it may remove their ignorance to some extent.

First reply: According to traditions, rewards are of two kinds:

1- Earned reward

2- Preferential reward

Earned reward is that which Allah has specified for particular acts in accordance with His wisdom and whoever performs those actions becomes eligible for it.

Preferential reward is that which Allah bestows in addition to the fixed rewards of a particular act. It is so because:

وَاللَّهُ ذُو الْفَضْلِ الْعَظِيمِ

"Allah is the Lord of mighty grace" (Al-Jumu’a, 62:4)

Thus after mentioning this point we say: It is possible that when traditions have come down for example that Almighty Allah will give the reward of a martyr to one who recites a particular prayer or supplication, it implies that the worshipper would be rewarded with the 'Earned reward' of the martyr and not its 'Preferential reward' and it is possible that the 'Preferential reward' of the martyr is much beyond that and which cannot even be imagined.

In other words, it can be said that by reciting a particular prayer, a person becomes eligible for the 'Earned reward' of a martyr and not for 'Preferent ial reward '. And it has come down in traditions that if a person performs a particular act, he would become eligible for reward of a hundred prophets, a hundred successors and a hundred angels. Thus it is possible that it implies that whenever that act is performed by a hundred prophets and successors, as much as they get the 'Earned reward ' for it, as much would be given to this person preferentially. For example, if it is mentioned in traditions that whoever performs two units of prayers tonight would be given 'Earned reward' of a hundred prophets. That is whenever a hundred prophets recite that prayer, the same quantum of reward will be given preferentially to him and not that he would be given the actual reward of the hundred prophets, who spent their lives in worship and propagation of faith.

Second reply: There is no doubt that the reward of every act depends on its acceptance and on sincerity with which it is performed.

وَمَا أُمِرُوا إِلَّا لِيَعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ حُنَفَاءَ وَيُقِيمُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَذَٰلِكَ دِينُ الْقَيِّمَةِ ۚوَيُؤْتُوا الزَّكَاةَ

"And they were not enjoined anything except that they should serve Allah, being sincere to Him in obedience, upright, and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, and that is the right religion." (Al-Bayyinah, 98:5)

Moreover, there are different grades of sincerity, the first stage being that the act should not be a show off and hidden polytheism, which is definitely wrong, and one who performs it will not get any reward; on the contrary it will be considered a sin and make the doer eligible for divine punishment. It is because show off is a greater sin and is considered to be a kind of hidden polytheism.

The next stage of sincerity is that the doer should not have its rewards in view. On the contrary his intention should only be focused on gaining proximity to Almighty Allah, as narrated from Amirul Momineen (a.s.) that:

"A worship performed in fear of punishment is a worship of slaves and worship performed in greed of Paradise is worship of traders. The worship performed considering Almighty Allah deserving of worship is in fact a worship of free men (nobles)."

There are many other grades of sincerity as well, which will unduly prolong this discussion. Therefore after this preface, we say that it is possible there are many rewards, which are mentioned in traditional reports, which may be in accordance to the grades of sincerity. As much sincerity one has, as much he will become eligible for those rewards and it is not concealed from those who have insight that it is very difficult to scale the grades of sincerity and to become eligible for their rewards. It calls for fighting against carnal desires and is in need of divine assistance.

Thus all cannot gain all grades of sincerity, except for some very few persons. And if acts of people like us can reach even the first stage of sincerity and remain devoid of hidden polytheism, it can be hoped from Almighty Allah that He would bestow some rewards to us even though it is very difficult for people like us to reach those stages. It is so because as long as one expects praise and detests criticism, one cannot remain safe from sincerity. And if it so happens that if our worship acts are not considered as a part of our evils, we should be highly thankful for it.

Sayyid Ibne Tawus (r.a.) applies this to the second stage of sincerity as mentioned before. That is, he will get the reward of acts which are not performed in greed of i ts reward. Thus if you have seen in a particular tradition that if you perform an act, you will become eligible for rewards of a hundred martyrs, it is not surprising, because it definitely implies one who has grades of sincerity. And as mentioned before, no grade of sincerity can be obtained without fighting against the self or without self control. It is so because the martyr goes to the battlefield once and he is killed, but the lover of sincerity battles with his carnal desires, day and night and continues to confront the Satan all the time.

Therefore a tradition of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) is mentioned in Al-Kafi that on return from a battle, he told his companions:

"Blessed be those who performed the lesser Jihad; but the Greater Jihad is pending for them."5

When people asked the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) what Greater Jihad is, he replied: "It is jihad against self."

Third reply: The reason such traditions are denied, because reciting such and such prayer or keeping such and such fast is done very easily. That is, it is accomplished in a short time, while Jihad and Hajj are difficult things. Therefore how can we compare such a supplication with being killed on the way of Allah?

Reply: It is only a mistaken notion, which results from ignorance about such supplications, prayers and other such worship acts. Because one has imagined only their face value and the ease with which they are performed, whereas the true value of those worship acts is not obvious. "The importance of every act depends on sincerity with which it is performed." Just as body is of no use without soul, in the same way worship without sincerity is valueless.

For example, if one performs two units of prayers, and only the body is involved in standing and bowing, and his tongue is busy in recitations; but his mind, throughout the prayer, is on something else. Thus that prayer will be without a soul. Even though it may keep him away from evils, it will not bring him near to Almighty Allah. Hence how can there be such rewards for this prayer?

In the same way, if one is only reciting a supplication verbally, it is of no use to him. Therefore if you have seen a tradition saying that reciting a particular supplication carries the reward of a martyr, it is definite that it is only when one recites it with sincerity; and it requires us to have certainty about ones helplessness. Also that one should be not repose hope in anyone except Almighty Allah that it is only He that can make it effective.

If a person is able to recite it in this way, he will indeed become like one who goes to fight Jihad in the way of Allah and sacrifices his life in it. And if one can gain a higher stage, i t is possible that he will earn a status higher than that of a martyr. That is when a martyr comes out to the battlefield to fight Jihad in the way of Allah, ignoring all material pleasures and focuses his attention on Almighty Allah; if the same condition develops in one reciting the supplication, there is no difference between him and a martyr.

If it is said: Even though in condition and reality both are equal, but the form the martyr’s act is indeed different and more difficult than the act of one who recites that prayer.

Its reply is that as mentioned in second reply, appearance of this condition is not easy and it cannot be obtained without fighting the self. As long as the person does not battle his self, how he would be able to obtain such conditions? ·

Whatever is mentioned on the topic of supplication its like is explained by Shaykh Ja'far Shustari (r.a.) in his Khasaisul Husainia in the explanation of the tradition of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) on the excellence of performing Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.). The Messenger of A llah (s.a.w.s.) said:

"Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) is equal to ninety Hajjs and ninety Umrahs that I have performed."

The Shaykh says: Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) is equivalent to the Hajj of the Prophet perhaps because when the visitor performs the Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) with enthusiasm and love for the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.), it is as if he has visited the Holy Kaaba. So when he comes to the holy grave, or he turns his attention to Imam Husain (a.s.) from afar, and performs the Ziyarat with a heavy heart, it is as if he has turned his attention to Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) and when he hears that Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) prolonged his prostration because Imam Husain (a.s.) climbed on his back, and as long as Imam Husain

(a.s.) did not dismount on his own. If at the time of performing the Ziyarat you continue to imagine that Imam Husain (a.s.) fell from his horse because of the hit of Salih Ibne Wahab, the accursed, and if you salute the Imam at that time, it would please him very much. It is just as if the Messenger of AlJah (s.a.w.s.) made an intention of visiting Imam Husain (a.s.). And since Imam Husain (a.s.) is better than the Holy Kaaba from ninety aspects (aspect about which we are unaware), that is why the reward of Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) has the reward of ninety Hajjs of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.).

The gist of Shaykh Ja'far Shustari's discussion is that if a person has same love for Imam Husain (a.s.) as the Prophet had, he would get the reward of the Hajj of Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.). Since we do not wish to prolong the discussion, we conclude at this point.

Question 74

Q.74: Are tears also produced in the same way as other body moistures like saliva, nasal mucus and ear moisture? Or it is due to burning of heart or fever arising from it?

A: Moisture essential for sight is always present in the eyes and watering is caused by internal as well as external factors. They include heat of the heart that results in thoughts, feelings or sentiments, which are unpalatable and horrible; which make heart burn and hence tears run from eyes. It goes without saying that every faculty made to work expands gradually. Likewise, if a person falls in deep tragic thoughts, he begins to weep and the quantity of eye water also increases thereby and tears roll down the eyes. If it is due to fear of Allah or longing to meet Him or separation from His friends, it is the best means of well being and eternal happiness. Pray that may the Almighty Allah grant i t to us.

Question 75

Q.75: What is the difference between hearing (Samaa) and hearing with attention (lstamaa)?

A: Samaa means hearing and the reaching of a sound to the ear of the hearer without intention or attention to it.

Istimaa means hearing or lending of ear with intention or desire and of following it. It is due to this that lstima of music is unlawful but its Samaa is not prohibited. There is no harm (sin) if music reaches the ears without one wanting to hear it. Also with regard to the hearing of verses of prostration, Islamic law says that if one had lstimaa, one must perform Sajdah, but if it was mere Samaa one may prostrate by way of precaution.

Question 76

Q.76: Religious Penance is lawful. What is tlie difference between 'Religious Penance' and 'Satanic Penance'?

A: Religious Penance in a person should make an all out effort so that all his deeds are in accordance with divine commands and not a single act should be performed on the basis of selfish desires. In other words, Religious Penance is practiced i n order to gain control over the power of piety. Since piety has some grades, therefore Religious Penance is also an effort to gain those grades in order to become free of dangers.

In NahjulBalagha it is mentioned that Amirul Momineen (a.s.) wrote in a letter to Uthman bin Hunaif as follows:

"'My only aim and courage is my self, that I should train it for piety so that it remains safe from different punishments of the hereafter and this alone is the right path."6

Types of Religious Penance

First grade: To perform all obligatory duties and to keep away from all prohibited things. That is one should endeavor not to leave any obligatory duty unfulfilled and that he acts in accordance with divine commands. Also that he should not commit any prohibited act. Moreover it is not concealed from people of insight that this is having more significance than bearing hardships in the path of penance and piety. For example one of the conditions of acceptance of deeds is sincerity of intention. Not only show off renders the deed invalid, it is a sinful act by itself. That is why it is very difficult to create sincerity in worship acts.

Allamah Majlisi writes in the commentary of Al- Kafi that as long as one likes praise and hates criticism, one is not safe from show off. Therefore to perform the worship as it should be performed is a difficult penance. That is why it is narrated from the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) in Usul Kafi that he said:

"Allah says: My slave does not gain My proximity except through the deed which I like most and which I have made incumbent on him."7

It means that nothing earns divine proximity as much as the performance of an obligatory duty and in the same way forsaking prohibited acts is very difficult for the self for example forsaking lying, back biting, allegations etc. and it is difficult to continue to refrain from them.

Second grade: To subject the self to penance for the sake of piety. One should try to fulfill recommended deeds and avoid detestable things in such a way that not a single detestable act should be committed and not a single recommended act should be missed, especially emphasized recommended acts and whose omitting is denounced in traditions. Like congregational prayer, remaining awake at dawn, supererogatory daily prayers, especially Midnight Prayer and punctuality in prayers; and sincerity in all worship acts, especially prayers. As much effort one makes, as much would one become proximate to his Lord as mentioned by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) at the conclusion of the above tradition that the Almighty Allah says:

"And indeed he does not earn My love except by performing the recommended acts till I love him. Thus when I love him, I become his ears with which he hears, and I become his eyes with which he sees, and I become his tongue with which he speaks; and I become his hands with which he gives and takes; and I become his legs with which he walks; and when he calls

Me, I harken to him and when he asks something from Me, I give it to him. "8

There are some senior personalities famous for avoiding all unlawful and detestable acts and all their deeds were either obligatory or recommended. Of them were Sayyid Ibne Tawus (r.a.), Abdullah Shustari, Shahid Thani and Muqaddas Ardibeli (r.a.). Scholars have narrated that these gentlemen did not even stretch their legs when sleeping and said that it was against good manners. In order to learn more about them and other scholars we can refer to Muntakhabut Tawarikh etc.

Third grade: Effort must be made to remove carelessness and inattention; and one must instead create an ability to remember the Alhnighty Allah and imagine oneself to be in His presence; and not to forget His eternality and presence at any stage. Also to keep from all that which leads to inattention about Him, so that one may reach the stage of understanding.

الَّذِينَ يَذْكُرُونَ اللَّهَ قِيَامًا وَقُعُودًا وَعَلَىٰ جُنُوبِهِمْ وَيَتَفَكَّرُونَ فِي خَلْقِ وَالْأَرْضِ السَّمَاوَاتِ

"Those who remember Allah standing and sitting and lying on their sides and reflect on the creation of the heavens and the earth ...” (Aale ‘lmraan, 3: 191)

Since this is prolonging the discussion too much, we would like to conclude this matter here. Though it is necessary to remind those who wish to obtain those grades that they must do all that is necessary, otherwise it would not be possible for them to reach those spiritual grades and the decorum of that penance is mentioned by Imam Ja'far Sadiq (a.s.) in the following tradition mentioned in the first volume of Biharul Anwar:9

"Beware, do not eat that for which you have no desire, because it will create foolishness and unawareness and do not eat till you are hungry; when you eat, you must eat only that which is lawful (avoid unlawful foods). Mention the name of Allah at the time of eating and remember the tradition of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) that he said: Man has not filled up any vessel worse than stomach. That is the more it is left empty, the better it is. If you are forced to eat, you must reserve a third of your stomach for food, a third for water and remaining to ease breathing."

It is narrated from Amirul Momineen (a.s.)' that he said:

I swear by Allah that barring His Destiny over which I have no control and which may mould my life as He wishes, I shall control myself that I shall be contented and happy if I get one piece of bread with a pinch of salt and that my mind will be dead to desires of pleasures, fame, power and glory. That is one must ensure that ones food is according to ones need and not more than that."10

Satanic Penance: It is that a person follows special rituals customary among those who act upon them and it is usually performed for material and unlawful aims. Of them is controlling of Jinns or to make the soul so strong as to accomplish extraordinary feats and all kinds of sorcery mentioned in the previous tradition and it was also mentioned that they commit such acts to gain proximity to Shaitan and even commit acts of disrespect with the Holy Quran etc. Or assure that they don't perform any good deed for forty days. They try to commit every unlawful act, like adultery; especially adultery with married women in the presence of their husbands.

It is also narrated that they even resort to shedding the blood of victims and they place the victim's blood in a special vessel and subsist solely on it for a period of time and even serve it to those who follow them in their acts.

Question 77

Q.77: What is the difference between miser (Bakheel) and extremely miserly (Laeem) and so also between charitable (Kareem) and generous (Sakhee)?

A : Bakheel is one who spends his wealth only for himself, without giving anything to anyone else.

Laeem is one who neither eats h imself nor feeds anyone else. On the contrary this is to such an extent that he dislikes anyone giving anything to anybody.

It is mentioned in Biharul Anwar that once His Eminence, Amirul Momineen (a.s.) gave five loads of dates (in charity). A fellow present there remarked: "Only one was enough for this man, five is too much."

His Eminence replied: "May Almighty Allah not create more people like you; I give something and you become stingy!"

Sakhee is one who takes benefit himself from his riches and also feeds others.

Kareem is one who does not spend his wealth on himself and feeds others without expecting any reward.

Question 78

Q.78: Define and describe the following terms: traditional report (Riwayat), sources (Darayat), solitary report (Khabar Wahid), report quoted through three or more chains (Khabar Mustfeez), widely related (Mutawatir), correct chains (Sanad Sahih), good chain (Sanad Hasan), reliable traditional report (Riwayat Motabar).

A: Traditional report (Riwayat): It implies quoting a tradition.

Sources (Darayat): It implies understanding the meaning of

a tradition depending on its authenticity.

Solitary report (Khabar Wahid): It is that which has not reached to the stage of widely related (Tawatur), whether its narrator is one or more. It is of different kinds.

A report reported through three or more chains (Khabar Mustfeez): It is that which has more narrators in every stage. Most scholars are of the view that it denotes a report which has more than three reporters at every stage. Thus every report which is related by three or more chains is known as Mustafeez .

Widely related (Mutawatir): It denotes a tradition narrated by a group, which cannot fabricate traditions or make false statement; such that anyone who comes to know about that report becomes certain that it is correct.

Authentic chain (Sanad Sahih): It is the chain of reporters which goes upto an infallible and all its reporters are just and followers of Shia faith.

Good chain (Sanad Hasan): It is that chain which goes upto an infallible and all its reporters are from Shia faith and they have been praised. However their justice has not been proved.

Trustworthy report (Khabar Mauthiq): It is a traditional report whose chain of reporters goes upto an infallible and all its reporters are certified by companions. However one of their reporters is not a Shia.

Weak report (Khabar Zaeef): It is the report which does not fit any of the above definitions. It is also of a few types: Mauqoof It is that whose chain does not reach upto an infallible; on the contrary it reaches upto an associate of an infallible. Maqtoo: It is the second type of Khabar Zaeef; that is a report whose chain reaches upto the companions of companions (Tabiin). Tabiin are those who have not seen the Imam. on the contrary they had remained in the company of the companions of the Imams.

Covert report (Khabar Muzmir): It is a report in which the name of the Imam is not clarified.

Difficult report (Khabar Muzii): It is a report in which two or more of its reporters are unknown.

Incompletely transmitted report (Khabar Mursal): It is a report in which some or all of the reporters are omitted.

In addition to the above, there are many other kinds of reports mentioned in books of tradition sciences.

Question 79

Q.79: What is the difference between jealousy (Hasad) and envy (Ghibta)?

A: When a person learns that the Almighty Allah has bestowed a person with a new blessing, he experiences either of the two conditions:

1- First type is that he is angry for the fact that he has received that bounty and he hopes that it would be taken away from him. Such a condition is known as jealousy (Hasad). That is to oppose anyone from getting any blessing and a hope that it is taken away from him.

2- The second type is that he is angry, because someone else has received some blessing and he is also not hoping that the person may lose his blessing. On the contrary he wants to have the same blessings. Such a condition is known as envy (Ghibta) in Arabic terminology.

Thus it is narrated from Imam Ja'far Sadiq (a.s.) that he said: A believer may feel envy (Ghibta) but he never feels jealousy (Hasad). On the contrary, the hypocrite feels jealousy (Hasad) and never envies (Ghibta).11

Jealousy (Hasad) is of four types:

In the first stage, the one who feels it (Hasad) desires that the blessing should be taken away even though it may not bring any benefit to him. It is the worst type of jealousy.

Another type is that in which he wants that blessing to be taken away from that person so that he may get it instead. For example a person is having a beautiful house or a pretty wife and another person wants to get hold of them somehow. Therefore, there is no doubt in the unlawfulness and evil of this type of jealousy.

Thus the Almighty Allah has said:

وَلَا تَتَمَنَّوْا مَا فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ بِهِ بَعْضَكُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ

"And do not covet that by which Allah has made some of you excel others...” (An-Nisaa, 4:320)

The third category of Hasad is that one aspires for that which others possess and which he is not having; but when he is unable to obtain that he wishes that the other person should also lose it. So that he also becomes like others. If this person is capable, he would do this himself.

The fourth category of Hasad is also somewhat l ike the third category. But that person, even though he is able to take away that blessing, he does not make an effort for it, because religion and reason stops him from that; on the contrary he is angry on himself. Thus there is hope for salvation of such a person. And his selfish desires are due to hi s own anger, and he is angry at his own condition, the forgiveness of Almighty Allah can come to his rescue. Therefore to gain more knowledge about the types and causes of Hasad one may refer to books of morals and ethics.

A point is worth mention with regard to Ghibta, which is ignored by most people. It is that a Ghibta which is lawful is that which does not reach to the level of Hasad. And mostly the danger from Ghibta is that because if someone tries to obtain the blessing that another person

is having, without desiring to snatch it from him, he will either get that blessing or not. If he does not reach it, sometimes his selfish desires make him want to feel that it should be taken away from him so that he may also become like others, because it is unbearable for him to see someone else taking precedence on him. Therefore this condition will make one imbued with the third and fourth kind of Hasad And very few people are safe from this condition, except those who are bestowed with perfect ethics and whom the Almighty Allah has kept away from evil traits. Such persons do not raise objections against divine destiny.

Question 80

Q.80: What is the difference between avoid (Audh) and to take refuge (Laudh)?

A: Both Audh and Laudh, according to dictionary meaning denote 'avoiding' or 'taking refuge’ and it is in the meaning of asking from a personality who can fulfill his needs; and one who may cure his pain and solve his problems. But from the aspect of usage that which is understood is that Audh is used when it had the five elements of seeing refuge (lstiaaza):

1- The Reality of lstiaaza: It is that the person realizes that he is surrounded by worldly and other worldly problems and is deprived of blessings of the world and hereafter and he is certain that he cannot remove even his most minor problem. He should have certainly that it is only Almighty Allah, Who can remove harms from him and there is no one more kind and generous than Him. Due to this, humility is created in him and he asks Almighty Allah to keep him safe from those calamities and to bless him in every way. Therefore he says: I seek refuge in Allah. It should also be clear that as far as a person cannot understand his true value as also his need and the true position and needlessness of the Lord, he has not understood the reality of lstiaaza.

Mustaeez: It is one who has understood the reality of /stiaaza, so he becomes humble to his Lord and seeks His refuge.

Mustaaz Bih: It is Almighty Allah or means and channels which Almighty Allah has appointed for people to beseech through. That is Muhammad and Aale Muhammad (a.s.), who are the beautiful names of the Lord.

Mustaaz Minhu: It is one who seeks refuge of Allah from the Satan, from his selfish desires or from an evil man in a condition of helplessness.

Mustaaz Li ijlhi: It is that due to which a man is motivated to seek refuge of Allah from the evil of Satan or another evil person.

However, laudh is used when the four elements of lltijaa (taking refuge) come together: l –Iltijaa (the taking of refuge) 2- Multaji (one who takes refuge) 3- Multaja llaih (one in whom refuge is taken) 4- Multaja Li Ijlihi (that from which refuge is taken).

After that, as we mentioned in Istiaaza12 , the reality of taking refuge (lltija) will become

clear. But Multaji is one who is surrounded by problems. Multaji Ilaih is the Almighty Allah and Multaji Li Ijlihi is that which causes the condition of Iljtija. Like disobedience or sins that he has committed; to become aware of its punishment or to remember difficulties of the world and hereafter; or to remember about deprivation of the world and hereafter such that one beseeches his Lord to remain safe from all this.

In other words it can be said that when a sinner escapes and takes refuge with his Lord, he says: Audh and when he notices his own loss and deprivation he seeks refuge from the Almighty Allah and utters A-loodhu bika and Wa laa Alooza bi siwaaka (I seek Your help and I don 't seek the help of anyone other than You).

Question 81

Q.81: When the Almighty Allah completed His proof on Bani Israel and guided them through the miracles of Prophet Musa (a.s.), the act of Samiri in creating sound in the calf was a test of the community and it is also confirmed that a miracle should be performed by a righteous and a truthfuI person like Prophet Musa (a.s.). But the act of Samiri also seems to be a miracle. It is so because it was not possible for anyone else to perform it and people cannot know whether Samiri is true or false.

Why did the Almighty Allah make the mud below the hooves of the horse of Jibraeel (a.s.) so effective that it caused some people to deviate from monotheism? And how Samiri had the knowledge about the amazing properties of that mud?

A: This deed of Samiri was not extraordinary. On the contrary it was a craft, because it is possible to make a calf out of silver or gold and to make it to create life-like sounds and such an accomplishment is not impossible. There are many such examples in the world. For example alarm clocks that crow like cocks and other animals and pronounce different words. But the casting of the staff by Prophet Musa (a.s.) and its changing into a python without the use of a craft is beyond human capability.

But it is difficult for people to know whether Samiri was true or false. It is against common sense, because he claimed divinity for something, which was made by hand. The Holy Quran says:

وَلَا تَتَمَنَّوْا مَا فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ بِهِ بَعْضَكُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ

"...and (that) it did not control any harm or benefit for them?" (Taa-haa, 20:88)

But Jibraeel taking a human form and riding a horse on the day Firon drowned, and moving of the mud below his feet, alI these are possible matters. It is mentioned in traditional reports that Prophet Musa (a.s.) had informed about all this beforehand. Therefore on the day Firon drowned, Samiri saw the mud below the hooves of Jibraeel's horse moving. So he picked some of it and continued to boast about it till he crafted a gold calf and placed the mud inside and it immediately emitted a mooing sound.

Yes, the seeing of Jibraeel by Samiri, the moving of mud, his picking of the mud, his not being prevented from crafting a calf, the mud not becoming ineffective and the creation of sound in the calf: all this was lack of good sense (Taufeeq) for Bani Israel from Almighty

Allah for which they became eligible when they said to Prophet Musa (a.s.): Make for us a deity like those idolaters. It was indeed a very difficult test for them although they had seen the great signs of Almighty Allah through Prophet Musa (a.s.). Among them was splitting of the sea and drowning of Firon. In spite of that they followed a man like Samiri.

Question 82

Q.82: Creation of Allah could never be defective, why should then a newborn be circumcised?!

A: The fetus and unborn child in the womb is fed through the navel (umbilical cord). The male and female sexual organs are absorbent. To prevent impurities and bJood from entering the nourishment of the fetus, the foreskin serves as a deterrent. After a male child is born, its foreskin becomes extra and there is also possibility of collection of microbes beneath it, which can cause diseases. That is why circumcision has been commanded. But female circumcision is only recommended, because with the passage of time, along with the growth of the body, the said skin is destroyed automatically.

Notes

1. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 52, Pg. 122

2. Biharuil Anwar, Vol. 70, Pg. 385

3. Raudatul Kofi, Vol. 8, Pg. 198

4. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 58, Pg. 310

5. Furu Kafi,Vol.1, Pg. 330

6. Nahjul Balagha , Letter 45

7. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 70, Pg. 22; Mahasin Barqi , Vol. 1 , Pg. 291

8. Biharul Anwar. Vol. 7, Pg. 22; Mahasin Barqi, Vol. I , Pg. 291

9. Vol.1, Pg. 126

10. Nahjul Balagha , Subhi Salih, Pg. 419, Letter 45.

11. Usul Kafi , Vol. 2, Pg. 307; Biharul Anwar, Vol. 73, Pg. 250

12. Recently the author's lstiaaza has been published which may be referred to by those who have interest.

Addenda to Fourth Edition

Wilayat Faqih and its sources

Q: Explain Governance of the Jurist (Wilayat Faqih), which is the basis of the government of Islamic Republic of Iran and which is based on five fundamentals.

A: The Holy Quran says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ۖ

فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ

تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ۚ

ذَٰلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا

"O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those in authority from among you; then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Apostle, if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end. " (An-Nisaa’, 4:59)

The repetition of the word of 'obey' in this verse proves that two types of obedience are obligatory. Obedience of the Almighty Allah in all religious laws like Prayer, Fasting, Hajj and political and social laws like Jihad, Penalties and Retaliation and judgment, whose fundamental principles are mentioned in the Holy Quran and its details are supposed to be explained by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) and the Holy Imams (a.s.). As mentioned in the following verse:

وَأَنْزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ

"...and We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them..." (An-Nahl,16:44)

And in the same way, He says:

فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ

"...so ask the followers of the Reminder if you do not know...” (An-Nahl, 16:43)

Acceptance of Wilayat is a condition of Faith

Second type of obligatory obedience: It is accepting the obedience of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.), leadership of Ummah and Imamate in all problems faced by Muslims, whether religious or social or a problem of application of political laws. The right of such a Wilayat is with the Almighty Allah, since He is the owner and creator of all and He has entrusted this Wilayat to his Messenger and the Prophet is infallible. Therefore he can never act on the basis of his selfish desires. Therefore to accept the Wilayat of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) is a condition of true faith. Thus He says:

فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىٰ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي تَسْلِيمًا أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا

"But no! By your Lord! They do not believe (in reality) until they make you a judge of that which has become a matter of disagreement among them, and then do not find any straitness in their hearts as to what you have decided and submit with entire submission. " (An-Nisaa’,4:65)

Rulership is only for the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) and believers will be truly devoted to them when they agree to their decisions without raising any objections and that they should accept it with sincerity, because the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) has never adjudged on the basis of his selfish desires to the detriment of someone else. On the contrary he has judged according to divine law.

In any case, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) was a divine messenger entrusted with the duty of conveying divine laws to the people. In spite of that he was an Imam of Muslims and he guided them; leading them in their social matters, till he passed away from the world.

Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) and death of Ignorance

After the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.), two types of obediences are obligatory till Judgment Day. That is just as the obedience of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) is obligatory in every age and in every matter in the same way is obligatory the obedience of an Imam whose obedience is obligatory in all times till Judgment Day. And in Shia and Sunni books, it is mentioned in widely related (Mutawatir) traditions from the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) that he said:

"One who dies without recognizing the Imam of his time (an Imam whose obedience was obligatory), his death will be a death of ignorance."1

It means that he does not die as a Muslim, because one who does not recognize the divine representative and does not follow him, has definitely followed one to whom he was inclined. Therefore his imam will take him where he himself goes, because that imam (leader) who is ignorant of truth and reality is himself selfish and he makes his follower as he himself is. Thus he drags him into every mischief.

يَوْمَ نَدْعُو كُلَّ أُنَاسٍ بِإِمَامِهِمْ

"(Remember) the day when We will call every people with their lmam...” (Al-Israa’, 17:71)

In every age, Muslims are obliged to have cognition of the Imam of their time and that they must follow h im, so that the divine representative may lead them on the right path and establish justice and equity in society. That he may save them from every kind of mischief, deviation and injustice. If people do not gather around the divine representative, each group will select a leader for itself and such disunity would lead the whole society into the quagmire of ignorance and finally take them to chaos and bloodshed. As a result of this, the tyrants of their time will gain power on them and they will be free to do whatever they like.

Thus it is mentioned in the Fadak Sermon of Lady Fatima Zahra (s.a.) that she said:

"Almighty Allah has made the lmamate of us, Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) as a means of safety and discipline of society so that unity may be maintained among people and that they remain safe, so that tyrants and satans may not dominate them."2

There is only one Imam at any given time

There should be one Imam in every age, even though two persons may be same from the aspect of leadership and eligibi lity; in spite of that one should be the Imam and the other the follower as in case of Imam Husain (a.s.) who was a follower of his brother, Imam Hasan (a.s.) during the period of the latter's Imamate.

It is mentioned in Uyun Akhbar Ridha’ in chapter 34, Pg. 101 that Imam Ali Ridha’ (a.s.) said: It is not possible that there should be two Imams at one and the same time and that both should be such that it is obligatory to obey them. Its evidence is that it is not possible for two persons to have the same opinion in every matter, thus in case of difference of opinion if the Muslims obey one of them, they would in fact be disobeying the other and as a result of the presence of two Imams, the people will be divided into groups and there will be mischief. Opposition of one of them is disobedience; as a result of which both of them will lose the status of Imamate.

Who is an Imam and who can appoint an Imam?

On this juncture, a question arises that who is that Imam of every age whose obedience is obligatory, and who appoints him to this post?

In the Holy Quran, Imamate is mentioned wholly as an institution of one vested with authority and since it is mentioned along with the authority of the Prophet, we should know that the one vested with authority should be exactly like the Prophet except that he does not have prophethood, so that his obedience should be obligatory like the obedience of the Prophet.

Imamate is a divine office that the Almighty Allah should specify through His Messenger, because if the appointment of the Imam rests with Muslims, it would be subjected to three points of doubts and objections.

The first is that it is impossible for all people to have consensus on one person or it is almost impossible. As a result of which every group will have its own Imam, whose invalidity is clear.

Even if we suppose that all people have consensus on one person, how can it be guaranteed that he is fit to lead the Muslims? That is he will be sure to lead the society on the path of success and prosperity and defend it from the danger of enemies. It is even possible that he drags the society in to misguidance like the blind who leads the blind or like the sick man who cures other patients.

Thirdly, it is not obligatory in religious law to obey a person chosen by human beings, because only Almighty Allah has discretion on all, since He is their creator and He has given a right to His Messenger and those vested with authority (Ulil Amr) and has declared their obedience obligatory. Therefore those vested with authority (Ulil Amr) should be like the Prophet and be immune from mistakes. Thus one who is not infallible, if his obedience is unconditional, he would be obeyed in illegal matters and errors as well, and Almighty Allah cannot issue such commands.

Therefore, it is necessary for the Imam and divine authority (Wali Amr) in every age that he should be the most knowledgeable, most superior and best of all. At the same time he should be also infallible; since it is beyond the capacity of people to recognize such personalities, because there are many contenders of this position. If the appointment of this Imamate is not by Almighty Allah through His Prophet, its invalidity is clear, because every group will choose its own leader and on the basis of selfish desires will be in conflict with their opposing group; as a result of which the divine laws, which were supposed to reform humanity, would be rendered completely useless and injustice and destruction will envelop the society.

The Prophet introduced 'those vested with authority' (Ulil Amr)

On the basis of correct traditions, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.), under the command of the Almighty Allah introduced 'those vested with authority' (Ulil Amr) and solved the dilemma faced by early Muslims. We shall mention only one of the widely related (Mutawatir) reports in this regard:

It is mentioned in Ghayatul Maraam (Chapter 42, Pg. 706) of Allamah Bahrani that:

Jabir bin Abdullah Ansar asked the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.): "Who are 'those vested with authority' (Ulil Amr), whose obedience is made obligatory by Almighty Allah?"

The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) replied: “They are my successors and Imams of Muslims. After me the first of them is Ali lbne Abi Talib (a.s.) and he will be followed by Hasan then Husain and then Ali bin Husain and then Muhammad bin Ali who is famous by the title of Baqir; and O Jabir you would live that time; so you must convey my greetings to him. After him will come Ja'far bin Muhammad, then Musa bin Ja 'far, then Ali bin Musa, then Muhammad bin Ali, then Ali bin Muhammad, then Hasan bin Ali and after that will come one who is my namesake and one having my agnomen; who is the Proof of Allah on the earth, Ibne Hasan lbne Ali (a.s.). He is the same through whom the Almighty Allah will conquer the whole earth and he is the same who will go into occultation. And Allah will keep only one firm on belief in his Imamate, whose heart had been tested for faith."

Obedience of the Imam during occultation

Q: Is obedience of divine appointee (Wali Amr) in force during occultation of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.)? If it is so, who is the one who wields this authority?

A: Authority of divine appointee (Wali Amr) and Imam will be in force till Judgment Day, just as it is obligatory to follow all religious and social laws till Judgment Day. And just as none of the Islamic law is going to be abrogated till Qiyamat, same is the case of obedience of Imam, which is the most important Islamic duties and which is the cause of endurance of Islamic faith and security of Islam from dangers of unbelievers; that also is not going to be abrogated ever.

Just as it was obligatory for the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) to appoint the Imam for Muslims after him so that people do not go astray, and the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) specified them whether the Muslims accepted them or not. In the same way it was obligatory for Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) also to appoint his representative for Imamate of Muslim during the period of his occultation and he appointed them as well.

“As for the new problems, refer to the narrators of our traditions . ."3 Here 'new problems ' imply the difficulties faced by Muslim and political and social matters of society and defending Muslims from unjust tyrants. Otherwise the laws of prayers, fasting, Hajj and Zakat are in force for more than a thousand years and which have been fully discussed and researched; it is not a 'new problem

General salvation of the poor is in agenda of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.)

Shaykh Tusi says:

"The reason for the occultation of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) and his non-interference in matters of Muslim is there because people are not ready to obey the Imam. To exercise full discretion and to save weak people of the world from oppressors and to spread justice and equity in the whole world, which is among the important duties of the Imam; and which depends on willingness of people is such that its conditions have not matured yet."

However to appoint his representative for leadership and point of reference of Muslims, especially for the Shia during occultation is not dependant on obedience of Muslims; on the contrary it is the duty of the Holy Imam (a.s.). He is supposed to appoint his representative whether people agree or not so that the proof is exhausted to all of them.

Thus from 260 A.H. to 334 A.H. it was the first period of the Imamate of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) in which he appointed four persons as his representatives; who are as follows:

Uthman bin Saeed, Muhammad Ibne Uthman, Husain Ibne Rauh and Ali Ibne Muhammad Saymoori. And the period of Minor occultation (Ghaibat Sughra) was of seventy-four years. After that he entrusted the representation to scholars capable to act as points of reference and he said: "They are my proofs upon you and I am the proof of Allah upon them."

He also said: "Whoever denies or opposes them, it is as if he has denied me and one who has denied me; has denied the Almighty Allah, which is akin to polytheism."

In another traditional report he says: "The application of all laws is under the control of scholars, who are the trustees of divine commands and prohibitions. "4

Now we shall state the conditions of jurisprudential authority (Marjaiyat), Imamate and leadership, which are mentioned in traditional reports.

Deep consideration in laws and certainty in beliefs

The first condition of being a point of jurisprudential reference (Marjaiyat) is deep knowledge of religious laws. Since the beginning of Islam a jurist is one having a deep knowledge of beliefs and principles of Islam. He was also supposed to have awareness of all Islamic laws and must also be putting them into practice.

Therefore it is necessary for the point of emulation and divine authority (Wali Amr) that he should be most knowledgeable and superior to all, so that the preference of inferior over the superior is not necessitated.

It is necessary for a point of emulation and leader that he should be well versed with Islamic principles and especially have conviction on the matter of monotheism. He should be clear of all doubts. In the same way he should have certainty about Judgment Day, which can be recognized by fear of Allah and awareness of ones responsibility and as far as derivation of Islamic laws is concerned, he should have reached to the stage of jurisprudential derivation (ljtihad).

Justice and opposing the selfish desires

Another fundamental condition for leadership and jurisprudential reference (Marjaiyat) is justice. That is one should refrain from all Greater Sins and also avoid the lesser ones. Moreover it is explained in some traditional reports that the Muslim ruler should be pure from many unsuitable points. Thus it is explained in detail as follows:

1- The role model (Marja) should not follow selfish and carnal desires. He should not be inclined to wealth, fame and status and honor and to gain superiority over others. He should not prefer his relatives over others.

Shaykh Murtada Ansari (r.a.) in his Rasail has mentioned in the chapter of evidence of solitary reports from Imam Hasan Askari (a.s.) that he said:

"Jurists who give preference to their relatives and followers even though they might be pious, over others even though they might not be pious and they give way to their selfish desires, their harm on Muslim society is more than the harm caused by army of Yazid on Imam Husain (a.s.)."

Therefore the point of emulation and the leader of Muslims should constantly seek the pleasure of Almighty Allah; he must follow only that which i s the truth and not that which he likes. In other words, he should purify his self so that he may discipline the whole society and if he has not purified himself, it is possible that he will drag the whole society to destruction.

Qualities of a leader according to Imam Ali (a.s.)

2- The point of emulation and divine authority (Wali Amr) should be pure from lowly trai ts of character and that he should be imbued with Islamic and human perfect qualities. Some words of Imam Ali (a.s.) are mentioned with regard to this: The gist is that the leader should not be miserly, hot tempered and cowardly.

"You know that it does not befit one who rules upon Muslims to be a miser, that he should be greedy to appropriate their property. "5

He must also not be ignorant of divine laws, so that he should not lead people astray due to his ignorance. He should not be harsh and hot tempered due to which he might cut off from the people (in other words, he should be kind and affectionate so that he can sacrifice himself on Islam and Muslims.6

He should not fear other kingdoms that he might be impelled to take one as a friend and take other as an enemy.

Some commentators have said that the leader should not be an oppressor and greedy for the wealth and property of Muslitns and that he should not prefer one group over the other.

He must also be such that he should not accept bribes in delivering judgments otherwise he would be trespassing on the rights of others. He should protect the rights of all and not invalidate the practice of the Prophet and divine laws; otherwise the Ummah will be destroyed.

On another occasion, Amirul Momineen (a.s.) says:

"If the presence of the pledge makers and presence of helpers had not exhausted the proof for me and if the covenant that Almighty Allah has taken from scholars had not been there that they will not bear to see the satiation of unjust and hunger of the victims, I would have abandoned caliphate without taking any part in it."7

These words imply that the best responsibility of ju risprudential reference (Marjaiyat) is to prevent oppression of oppressors and to help the weak and oppressed.

Scholars should also obey the leader

Whatever is mentioned so far shows that governance of the jurist (Wilayat Faqih) denotes that during the occultation of the 12th Imam, Imam Mahdi (a.s.) the just jurist (Faqih), whose qualities have been mentioned above is the divine authority (Wali Amr) of Muslim and their leader, and all Muslims are obliged to obey him; so much so that even the scholars and jurists are bound by his obedience.

If there is a jurist (Mujtahid) who considers himself as the most learned in the world, and follows his own view in organizational matter, he is still obliged to follow the leader in political matters.

Obedience of Muslim leader is one of the most important divine duties. It is so because endurance of Islamic system and defense of Muslims from oppressors and disbelievers is also from his effects, as Imam Ali Ridha’ (a.s.) has mentioned:

"The Almighty Allah made obedience of divine authority (Wali Amr) obligatory in every age from a few aspects and some of them are as follows:

1- Since the Almighty Allah has specified some laws and limits to prevent mischief and trampling of rights of one from others, and most people are such that they are not ready to act upon them due to material benefits, therefore they ignore them. Therefore Almighty Allah for well being of society has appointed a responsible person and a leader of people who will compel them to follow that law and his disobedience will make one eligible for penalties and punishments.

2- The survival of every community, living together in the world and preventing oppressors from them are dependant on their obedience of the divine authority (Wali Amr) so that he may keep them united and that they may confront the enemies, and that they may prevent oppressors from dominating Muslims.

3- Among those causes is defense of Islam and its survival, because the Imam obeyed by people stops innovators and prevents them from leading people astray and from interpreting the Quran and Sunnah in accordance with their whims.8

All misfortune is because of ignoring Wilayat

If all Muslims after the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) had really obeyed the divine authority (Wali Amr) in every age, oppression would never have become common among them and whenever someone had been oppressed there would have been intervention from divine authority (Wali Amr) and the oppressor would have been compelled to make good the usurped rights of the oppressed. The oppressors would never have been able to gain an upper hand over Muslims. Deviation would not have entered Islam from apostates and innovators and all these conflicts and battles would not have occurred.

Freedom and stability under rule of Jurist

For fourteen hundred years, Iranian Muslims remained bound to the tyranny of Shah as a result of which, conflicts, battles and deviations appeared in religion of Islam. Later they followed the authoritative jurist (Wali Faqih) of their time and the point of emulation, Ayatullah Sayyid Ruhullah Musawi Khomeini and because of his excellent leadership and steadfastness of people, the oppressive regimes, especially America, was defeated in their plots. Thus they overthrew the 2500-year-old Shah regime and by the grace of Allah, our country is absolutely free and stable and it is not dominated by any oppressive power.

"Be so that your rulership may shine"

To reform laws opposed to Islam, which are remnants of the past regime and which are being promoted by incapable persons at the helm of affairs and injustice wrought on those deprived of rights, to regain them, passage of time is necessary. And all know how after the success of Islamic revolution in our country America and other enemies of Islam tried to create strife. How for more than a year, we are attacked by Iraq? If Almighty Allah had not helped, the revolution would have been defeated in the first week only.

In other words, the tyranny of the oppressive regime has ended and other reformations will take place gradually. All know that the group opposed to Islamic revolution wanted to adopt the American version of Islam and desired that spirituality should be weakened. It was so because the governance of the jurist (Wilayat Faqih) and obedience of divine authority (Wali Amr) should be taken away, so that way may be cleared for the return of America. But for the intelligence of Imam Khomeini and public support, the enemy would have definitely succeeded. Therefore I pray for the long Iife and health of Imam Khomeini and unity of people.

Reappearance of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.)

Q: What will be process of reappearance of lmam Az-Zaman (a.s.)? Would he modify some Islamic laws? Or the same duties and laws of early Islam will be enforced in his rule? It is mentioned in traditional reports that His Eminence would fill up the earth with justice and equity, would this world justice be with the help of people or through miracle? Would it be achieved in one step altogether or gradually through passage of time? Also whether this universal justice is with regard to countries and regimes or with regard to all the people?

A: Among the qualities of Islam is that it is going to endure forever. That is Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) is the last Prophet and no prophet is to come after him and the Holy Quran is the last book and the law of Islam is also that which was explained through the infallible Imams (a.s.) and there is no topic that is going to be confronted by the people, but that its order has been explained. Therefore we must pay attention to the translation of the following verses:

وَمَنْ يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الْإِسْلَامِ دِينًا فَلَنْ يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ

“And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him…”(Aale Imraan, 3:85)

Also

وَلَٰكِنْ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ

“ but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Last of the prophets…”( Al-Ahzab, 33:40)

And

الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ ادِينً

“This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion…”(Al-Maidah, 5:3)

This verse according to reliable traditional reports was revealed at Ghadeer Khum before the passing away of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.).

Modification of laws proves invalidity of claim

Therefore if someone comes claiming to be Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) and also manages to gain some victories and perfoms some extraordinary acts, if he abrogates any of the established principles of Islam and frames a new law, it would be sufficient to prove his falsehood.

In other words, when Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) will appear, he would enforce and renew the same Islamic laws, which are practiced by Muslim and he will act according to the same Quran. During the period of his reappearance the responsibilities of Muslims will be same as duties obligatory on them since the inception of Islam. The same laws and procedures will continue in case of vows and covenants and same is the case of all penalties and laws, of whom the matter of Jihad is the most important one and Muslims have given them up since centuries; and because of leaving Jihad, Muslims have remained prisoners and humiliated by deniers and oppressors.

But, by the grace of Almighty Allah, today they have performed this obligatory duty and overthrown the regimes of oppressors and prevented oppressive regimes, especially America, from getting a hold on an Islamic country like Iran; and they continue to confront their agents and supporters like Saddam. It is hoped that this great revolution will be joined to reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) so that during the period of the Imam (a.s.) Jihad may be fulfilled completely.

Spread of Justice is gradual and voluntary

Without any doubt, during the period of lmam Az-Zaman (a.s.) the spread of justice and equity in the whole society will be voluntary and gradual; which can be explained in a way that the movement to perfection of all existing beings except for human beings is natural. That is Almighty Allah has created them in such a way that whether they like it or not, He will take them to perfection. Thus the plant from the time it is a seed till it fructifies and sperm from the time of its inception till it assumes the form of a child and till he grows up, it is not having any discretion.

However human beings from the aspect of their physical perfection; like digestion, organs of respiration, strength and weakness, old age or death, all this is natural and it is not dependant on human intention and desire; and with regard to this, he is similar to other beings.

But he is deliberate from the aspect of humanity and spirituality. That is in order to reach perfection man will have to observe justice and he will have to act on laws which Islam has explained in detail. In his behavior and style he is not helpless from any aspect; whether he adopts the path of justice or selects the way of injustice.

That is what Allah has intended: that man should adopt the path of justice in order to reach to perfection and this same divine practice was customary in every age from the beginning of creation of man till the last age; as He has stated in the Holy Quran:

وَلَنْ تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا

"...and you shall not find any change in the course of Allah. "(Al-Ahzab, 33:62)

How the whole world will be filled with justice deliberately?

Now the question arises that when the majority has adopted the path of injustice and oppression till that the whole world is fraught with injustice and inequity, how it can be possible to establish justice and equity through their choice. Especially in countries which are roots of injustice and through their material power they are dominating the 4/5 million oppressed Muslims.

The reply is that if it is supposed that weapons and oppression can be removed through material means and causes; such a thing is usually impossible. But if all attack in unison, they can definitely shake up their foundations and they can uproot them completely; as in the case of Iranian Muslims who became united to overthrow the tyrannical regime of the Shah supported by the satanic power called America.

In other words till people do not wish to destroy the oppressors and till they don't dominate them, it seems that they are not prepared for the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.); except that the Almighty Allah should employ another method.

Perfection of intellects after the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.)

The spread of justice will take place among people after oppressors have been destroyed completely from society and in their place there will be righteous and just people. Then all would willingly or unwillingly move towards justice. Especially when oppressors and criminals will be meted out punishments and rights of victims are restored and they will see the good signs of society.

Therefore pay attention to the following tradition of Imam Muhammad Baqir (a.s.):

"When our Qaim reappears, the Almighty Allah will place the hand of His mercy on the heads of people so that their thinking and aim is synchronized."9

This tradition shows that by auspiciousness of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) human society will attain intellectual maturity and through contemplation will subdue satanic and selfish desires like hoarding of wealth or gaining status which requires trespassing the rights of others. The people would recognize and avoid them and all would prefer the path of reform to the way of mischief as a result of which the flag of Islam will fly in the whole world.

Conclusion

Whatever we have mentioned so far clarifies the following:

1- Wilayat means Imamate, leadership and authority in the social issues of Muslims and acknowledgement of Wilayat denotes obedience. Therefore Muslims are bound to accept the commands of prohibitions of the Imam, and to refrain from personal views.

When in Ghadeer Khum the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) made the Wilayat of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) and Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) obligatory, a person asked him: "What is this Wilayat for which you are eligible?"

He replied: "To listen and to obey all that which you may like or not."

That is you must obey all the commands of your ruler, whether it is according to your temperament or not.

2- The Imams whose obedience is obligatory are the twelve infallible Imams and during the occultation of the twelfth lmam, the just scholar who is fully qualified, is like an infallible Imam as far as the matter concerning obligatory acts in administering the affairs of Muslims is concerned. That is only in the legislative authority (Wilayat Tashri-i) but not from the aspect of natural authority (Wi/ayat Takweeni). He is superior to common people but not the Holy Imams (a.s.); so much so that the Imams are superior even to the prophets.10 11

The aim of the reappearance of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) is to establish justice and equity in the whole world through destruction of oppressors and after that the Imam wi ll put it into practice. It will happen when all people give up the obedience of oppressors just as it happened by grace of Allah in Iran and other countries and it is hoped that the Islamic revolution wi II hera ld the reappearance of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.).

The gradual spread of justice and equity means that before the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (a.s.) its prefaces will begin through enlightenment of good people and after reappearance of Imam (a.s.) it will continue as long as Allah wants.

Social justice: That is all social matters, whether economic, cultural or administrative, will based on a just system.

Personal justice: That is moderation has to be observed in everything related to daily life of man: like food, garments, shelter and marriage etc.

The gist of personal justice is that each man should observe justice in his personal matters, which can be gained gradually through the maturing of human intellect and through the light of guidance and faith.

Now in order to complete our discussion we present a beautiful discussion of Ustad Makarim Shirazi about worship in two hemispheres. (It is related to question no. 57)

The Midnight Sun endangered Islam

How is it possible for Islam to be a universal faith when its worship acts, like prayer and fasting is not possible in every corner of the world? Because as we all know, at the north and south poles, days and night are of six-month duration; hence neither can we pray there nor keep fasts.

It is an objection, which is taken as a pretext to object to the universality of Islam.

Some days ago a famous journal raised this objection voci ferously that: "The Midnight Sun endangered Islam."

If you are a sincere Muslim and if you fulfill all religious duties at proper times, you should pray that you don't not pass through countries like Greenland and Finland and other polar regions, because we all know that the sun does not set in the month of August and the same topic was brough t to the attention of scholars of Al-Azhar University of Egypt during last Ramadhan.

At present some people live in Finland and they have reached there due to different reasons. Since the sun does not set there during August or rarely does so, one cannot even have a single meal. Therefore Muslims of Finland face insunnountable problems. Are they supposed to fast during all the months? Should they give up eating altogether? But it is impossible. Or that they should omit the most important worship act of their religion?

In order to know the solution of this problem, they referred to jurists and scholars of Egypt (since they were Sunnis) and they have so far not been able to solve their dilemma.

This was the gist of the article published in the above mentioned magazine and we are still asked about this problem.

A: As the coming explanation will clarify, neither the Midnight Sun of Finland has endangered Islam nor the Muslims residing there are supposed to abstain from food for a whole month and commit suicide. Nor is it required for them to omit the most important duty of their faith and neither scholars, Shia or Sunni are helpless in solving this problem. It is also incorrect to label this problem as indecipherable.

On the contrary, scholars have explained the solution of this problem when they have written about Islamic duties. But due to the remoteness of people from scholars in their view there is no solution to it! It is also obvious that this difficulty is not only associated with fasting. On the contrary it will be encountered in many other laws of Islam as well. Is it possible that only praying a few units of prayer will suffice in a month, whereas daily seventeen units are obligatory or would 17 units suffice for a period of six months in places which have days and nights of six month duration?

But it is not known whether the author has considered the midnight sun of Finland as a danger only to Islam, if it is supposed that long days of Finland and other polar regions is a headache only for Islam it is also a danger to the Christians' Sunday and prayer and fasting of Jews. Because in every religion there are some rituals and worship acts which are connected to day, night, week and month.

But as we stated before, this problem was a topic of discussion in Islamic jurisprudence and our jurists have explained it clearly, however since the objection makers do not actually have anything to do with such books and they think just as this problem is bewildering to them, it is similarly confusing to others as well.12 In any case before replying this question we explain three points:

Equal duration of days and nights in Polar Regions

1- Nights and days of more than 24 hours duration are not restricted only to Finland and Scandinavian countries; on the contrary they are present in all areas above 66/5 degrees north and south or corresponding to them.

In other words, in all areas lying between 66/5 degrees and 90 degrees, which in fact are true Arctic and Antarctic regions and in all or some years have days and nights of a long duration and as much the region is above the 66/5 latitude to the north, as much would be prolongation of nights and days in that region; for example, in Finland, which lies at 70 degrees north; a long day has sixty and some days which begins at start of the month of Khordad and continues till start of Mirdad month and one night also consists of two months, which begins at the start of month of Azer and continues till end of Demah (tenth month); that is the length of this long night would be equal to length of day from the aspect of season in the region opposite to it.

When we travel to the area 74 degrees north, each day becomes as long as three months which begins from middle of Ardbehisht and continues upto middle of Mirdad and it wou ld be seen that each night is also of three months' duration beginning from middle of autumn and stretching upto middle of summer.

In the same manner, as much as we move northwards, the length of days and nights would go on increasing ti ll we finally reach the North Pole, which is in fact 90 degrees north. The region at this point, instead of 365 days and nights experiences only one day and one night of six months' duration each in every year.

But please note that the number of six months is not precise; because the duration of day in Arctic region will be six months and some days and night would be a few days less than a period of six months and it would be vice versa in Antarctic region.

Areas lying above 66/5 degrees upto 90 degrees are called as Polar Regions and there is very sparse habitation in these northern and southern Polar Regions, most of which lies in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Russia.

Recently some intellectuals have traveled to Arctic and Antarctic regions for scientific studies and research and they are counted as temporary residents of these regions.

But there is no doubt that even if one person lives there or that he travels to that region for a short time, it is necessary that there should be a clear order for him from viewpoint of Islamic law, which is universal and not restricted to any particular area of the globe.

As for the region lying below 66/5 degrees south, it has days and nights throughout the year, the duration of which is same only on two days of the year (beginning of spring and beginning of winter) and remaining days have differences with each other which gradually become less or more only till you reach upto the equatorial region which is like a waistband of the earth. Here throughout the year, duration of nights and days is same and each of them is of twelve hours and there is minimum difference between their durations in summer and winter.

Determination of Noon and Midnight in Polar Regions

2- Another important point is that the area where sun does not set and that which in terminology is called as the Midnight Sun, the sun there rotates around the horizon and it completes one circle around it in twenty-four hours. Although the fact is that the earth rotates, but it seems that the sun is rotating around it. That is if you live there for a month where the sun does not set in some cities of Finland you will see that a dull circle of the sun is always at the edge of the horizon and is rotating around it like the second hand of clock. And it completes one circle around the horizon in twenty four hours; and gradually it moves from the east to the south and then to the west and from there to the north. And then again it returns to the east.

We should however remember that if the ball of the sun is always visible at the edge of horizon, during twen ty-four hours its distance from horizon is not same. Sometimes it goes up a little and reaches the zenith and then come to the bottom of horizon and reaches to the minimum level and again starts rising.

The reason why the condition of the sun changes is that its orbit is inclined at 23.5 degrees. (Pay attention to this). In this way when the sun reaches its highest point it is considered as noon, because at that time it is half way in its orbit.

In other words you can say that when the sun is at its peak it is noon and when it is at the lowest point it can be said to be midnight.

It is also clear that light and darkness in those areas is also not the same. On the contrary when the sun is up, there is day and atmosphere is also lighted and bright and when it goes down and reaches the horizon, there is darkness.

The above explanation shows that it is very easy to determine noon and midnight in those areas. And if a person plants a rod in the ground, he can through the shortening and lengthening of its shadow determine noon and midnight. That is when it is at its minimum, it is midday.

But this is only possible when it is day all the time; but what is to be done when there are long nights in those areas?

Thus we say that during those long nights, the rotation of sun around the horizon is same as its rotation in long days. And in clearer words it can be said that stars rarely rise and set there. They seem to be circling the horizon, whereas actually it is the earth which is rotating and not stars. But their rotation around horizon is not same. Sometimes they go above it and sometimes come down in such a way that if we fix one star as a point of reference when it reaches the highest point it will be noon and when it is at the lowest, it will be midnight.

Also do not ignore the fact that the darkness of long nights is also not same always; thus when there is some light, it ts considered as day and when there is complete darkness, it is night.

After these explanations it can be concluded that determination of noon and midnight during long days and long nights of Polar Regions is very much possible and is not even needful of instruments like clock and radio etc.

Limit of Moderation is the Criterion

3- The mention of the last point is very important for replying the next question. It is that from the angle of Islamic jurisprudence there is no subject or event without a command. In other words, the law of Islam is so comprehensive that it has not ignored anything. It is not a mere claim, it is a fact; thus for those who are conversant with legal matters it is clear to them that there are two kind of subjects.

1- There are some topics whose laws are only related to them and in Islamic sources its command has been described clearly. (In scientific terminology they are specific).

2- There are some topics for whom no particular rule is fixed. Thus we will have to refer to Islamic rules and fundamental principles and through that we will have to derive its command.

Let me clarify that there are some fundamental rules in Islam in which all future events and possibilities have not been taken into account. On the contrary if we refer to them we can derive the solution. So comprehensive are those rules that from the scientific point of view it is not possible to find a topic that has not been included in it.

In our view the matter of those who inhabit Polar Region is of the second type; that laws concerning them can be derived from fundamental principles.

Here we don't wish to confuse the reader in jurisprudential complexities and that we interpret and explain the above problem for them. But there is no problem if scientific derivation of this matter is based on the same thing. Let me explain it in simple terms that most Islamic laws are framed taking into consideration ordinary aspects of life. Thus all those who are beyond this circle, should act according to the general practice of common people.

For example all know that in ablution, the face is supposed to be washed from the hairline to the chin. Now if the hairline of a person is different; for example it grows from near the eyebrow; it is obvious that such a person will not take his hairline as criterion; on the contrary all scholars have ruled that he should take the commonly accepted criterion and wash his face.

Or with regard to a Kur of water which is supposed to be 3.5 hand spans in all three dimensions. Its command is also on the basis of common parlance. Thus if a person is having a hand span of extraordinary dimensions, it will never be taken as standard for measuring the quantity of water. They will have to act according to local parlance and keep in view the moderate limit and all laws of Shariah are according to common parlance.

It is such a universal law, which is not associated with a particular topic. Therefore our jurists have applied same principle regarding those who inhabit Polar Regions. Thus some jurists have issued verdicts that they should act like inhabitants of moderate regions. Since the duration of days and nights in those areas is opposed to duration in moderate zones; thus they are supposed to refer to these zones and fulfill their religious duties. For example if the month of Ramadhan is in beginning of summer and a day in moderate areas (from sunrise to sunset) is of 15 hours, they should fast for 15 hours during month of Ramadhan and when month of Ramadhan is at beginning of winter and if duration of day is 12 hours in moderate regions, they should fast for 12 hours and also pray accordingly.

Have you noticed how easy is the solution of this problem which was apparent y insurmountable; through a fundamental principle of jurisprudence without leaving any scope for doubt?

Final conclusion with a little explanation

It has become clear from the above discussion that it is not the religious duty of inhabitants of Polar Regions to fast the whole month or to pray only a few units of prayers. On the contrary they are obliged to act according to horizon of moderate regions.

As we explained above, the determination of true noon is possible without use of any instrument and there is also a well known tradition that “when sun passes the meridian, it is time for Zuhr and Asr prayers," can also apply to them.

Just as midnight in those areas can be determined through the lowest and highest position of sun, Maghrib and Isha can also be determined through the same method.13

Therefore the beginning time of two prayers and last time of other two prayers can be calcu calculated through some other means only through movement of sun .

In the same way it was also mentioned that increase and decrease of light can lead to determination of day and decrease and increase in darkness can lead to determination of nights in those areas.

Notes

1. Usul Kafi , Vol. 2, Pg. 208

2. The exposition of this sermon is published separately under the title of The aim of creation is servitude written by Ayatullah Dastghaib.

3. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 78, Pg. 380

4. Biharul Anwar , Vol. l 00, Pg. 80

5. Biharul Anwar, Vol. 25, Pg. 167 Nahjul Balagha , Faizul Islam, Sermon 13I, Pg. 407

55 Nahjul Balagha, Faizul Islam, Sermon 131 , Pg. 407

6.

7. 56 Nahjul Balagha , Faizul Islam, Sermon 3, Pg. 52

8. And if he asks, 'Why did He establish some to be in charge of affairs and ordered us to obey them? '

It is said, 'For many reasons. One of them is for the people to know that there are some known lim i ts and they are ordered not to transgress beyond these limits so that they will not become corrupt. This would not be implemented unless a trustworthy man is appointed to prevent them from transgressing and getting involved in what has been prohibited for them. Were this not the case, no one would abandon what fulfilled his lustful desires and brought him some gains - even if it corrupted others. Therefore, God appointed someone to be in charge of their (the people's) affairs to carry out the divine decrees and divine chastisements amongst them and prevent them from getting corrupt.

Another reason is that we know of no group or nations who have survived living without someone in charge of them or leading them regarding their religious and worldly affairs. Thus it would not be deemed proper according to the wisdom of the All Wise (God) to leave the people without one in charge of their affairs, while He knows that there is no other choice for them and they would not sustain without one. The people would fight their enemies, distribute national income, establish congregations and congregational prayers, and protect the oppressed from the oppressors under his (the leader's) divine leadership.

Another reason is that if He does not establish a trustworthy custodian for them, their nation would be totally destroyed, their religion would be lost, their tradition and decrees would change: innovators would add things to them and atheists would subtract things from them and make them dubious for the Muslims. We have found the oppressed and the needy to be imperfect and narrow-minded. Moreover, they have various levels of intellectual abilities, desires and varying opinions. Thus as we said before, they would all get corrupted if there was no one appointed to be in charge of their affairs to safeguard what the Messenger (s.a.w.s.} has brought to them from Him. Then the divine decrees, the traditions, the foundations of the religion and faith would all change. This would ultimately result in corruption of all the people. ' (Uyun Akhbar Ridha’ (a.s.). Vol. 2, Chapter 34, Pg. I 00)

9. Usul Kafi, Vol. 1 , Pg. 29, The Book Knowledge and Ignorance. Tr. no. 21

10. In the interpretation of the verse of Mubahila, Imam Fakhruddin Razi

says: "Wi th regard to 'our selves' it can be said that just as the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) was superior to all the prophets in the same way, Imam Ali (a.s.) is also superior to all the prophets.

11. As far as obedience is concerned, Imam Khomeini is equal to Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.) but from the aspect of the position of natural Wilayat, he has said: Our life be sacrificed at the feet of Imam Az-Zaman (a.s.).

12. Urwathul Wuthqa, Muhaqqiq Yazdi, Part 1 2

13. Although the calculation of half a day over here is by the calculation of midpoint between the sunset and sunrise and the midnight is detennined as the midpoint between sunset and sunrise which a little before it.

Slavery in Islam

Slavery in Islam1

Perhaps this is the most odious form of doubt exploited by communists in order to shake the faith of Muslim youth in his religion, Islam. If Islam were suited to every period of human history, it would not, as it did, approve of slavery, which proves conclusively that Islam was but meant for a limited period of history only. It has fulfilled its mission and now stands outmoded and obsolete for it was not designed to be a religion for all times and climes.

The sincere Muslim youth is also haunted by similar doubts. Why did Islam permit slavery? This religion is no doubt revealed by God: there can be no doubt about that, and that it was revealed for the good of the whole of mankind for all times to come, but how is it that it allowed slavery?

How did the religion based on the notion of perfect equality among men, stressing the common origin of them all and then successfully translating its concept of equality in its social life, recognize slavery as a part of its social system and as such made laws for it?

Does God intend that human beings for ever should remain divided as masters and slaves? Does He want that the human race should continue to have a group of people among them that is sold and bought as chattel as was the case with slaves, when He Himself said of human beings:

وَلَقَدْ كَرَّمْنَا بَنِي آدَمَ

“And surely We have honored the children of Adam ...” (Al-Isra, 17:70)

. .and if God did not intend or like it, why did He not then explicitly forbid it in His Book and abolish it outright as He did, for instance, abolish drinking, gambling and usury etc., the practices which He abhors? In short, the Muslim youth knows that Islam is a true religion but like Abraham he is perplexed and seems to be in a state of mind described in the Quranic verse:

قَالَ أَوَلَمْ تُؤْمِنْ ۖ وَإِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ رَبِّ أَرِنِي كَيْفَ تُحْيِي الْمَوْتَىٰ ۖ

قَالَ بَلَىٰ وَلَٰكِنْ لِيَطْمَئِنَّ قَلْبِي ۖ

"And when Ibrahim said: My Lord! show me liow Thou givest life to the dead, He said: What! and do you not believe? He said: Yes, but that my heart may be at ease. " (Al-Baqarah, 2:260)

As against this the youth, whose reason is impaired and beliefs confused by imperialistic machinations, does not wait for truth to be made clear before him, but is swept away by his passions and, without any inclination to inquire into the reality, jumps to the conclusion that Islam is antiquated and, hence, is no longer needed by man.

The communists, who hoodwink people by claiming to be scientific, trade in ideas borrowed from their masters abroad which they arrogantly parade giving a false impression of having discovered an unalterable and eternal truth, the genuineness of which cannot be challenged, nor contradicted.

The truth they claim to have discovered is dialectical materialism - the theory which states that human life is divided into certain definite economic phases such as can neither be avoided, nor passed by mankind viz. first communism, slavery, feudalism, capitalism and the second communism (deemed to be the last page in the book of history) and that all creeds, disciplines, and thoughts that human history knows of were in fact a mere reflection of the various economic conditions or economic systems that prevailed at different periods of human history.

These past creeds and beliefs were all right for those bygone ages, for they fully coordinated with the economic structure and circumstances of those times but they can never be suitable for the next higher stages of human development as these are always based on quite a new and different pattern of economy.

Hence, they conclude, there can be no single system of life such as could be suitable for all times to come. Now as Islam came to the world at a time when the stage of slavery was coming to an end and that of feudalism just beginning, it brought with itself laws, creeds and a discipline of life all of which were in concord with the prevalent circumstances of economic existence. That is why it approved of slavery as well as permitted feudalism, for Islam could not anticipate the next stage of economic development nor give any system to the world for which the economic conditions were not yet ripe for, as the blessed Lord Karl Marx said, it wa absolutely impossible.

We intend to discuss this problem of slavery in its historical, social as well as psychological context with an open mind and without allowing ourselves to be hoodwi nked by the clamors of these tricksters and so-called scientific scholars.

When a modern man looks at the problem of slavery with his twentieth century background and in the light of the hideous crimes perpetrated during the slave trade and the abominably barbarous treatment that was meted out to slaves (especially in the Roman Empire) he discovers it as a most shocking and horrid crime. He is at a loss and finds it extremely difficult to understand as to how such a thing could be approved of by a religion or a system of life. He wonders: how could Islam allow slavery when all its other laws and principles point towards the freedom of man from all types and forms of slavery? And then overwhelmed by a sense of shame he desires: would that Islam had set our hearts and minds at ease by banning slavery in clear, explicit terms!

Let us pause here awhile and see as to what story the historical facts have got to tell us. The fact is that the hideous crimes committed against the slaves in the Roman Empire are quite foreign to Islamic history. We have got ample evidence with regard to the life the slaves in the Roman world led which is quite sufficient to illustrate the great change brought about by Islam in their fate.

The slave in the Roman world was considered a mere “commodity" and not a human being. He had no rights whatsoever although he was encumbered with cumbrous duties and obligations. And whence did these slaves come? They were captured in wars, which were not initiated by any noble principle or lofty ideals but were solely directed by a wish to enslave other people and exploit them for self-aggrandizement.

These wars were waged in order to enable the Roman people to indulge in licentious luxuries and live in prosperity, enjoy cold and hot baths, costly costumes, delicious and tasty foods of every kind, and revel in sensual pleasures-drinking bouts, whoredom, dancing as well as public gatherings and festivals. In order to provide for these enjoyments they subjugated other nations and exploited them most mercilessly. Egypt which was freed from the Roman overlordship by Islam was treated no less cruelly. It constituted a granary of wheat for the Roman Empire, besides furnishing various kinds of other material resources.

To satisfy this greedy lust of the Roman imperialists the slaves toiled for them in the fields. As mentioned above, they enjoyed no rights. When working in the fields they were fettered in heavy manacles so as to prevent their running away. They were never fed properly but given provisions just sufficient to keep them alive and fit to do their work, and this too not because they thought it was their right to be provided for with sustenance as even the beasts and trees are. During the work they were whipped just for the savage pleasure of it which was much relished by their sadist lord or his agent. At the end of the day large groups of them - from ten to fifty rnen a group and still fettered in their manacles - were herded together to sleep in dark, foul-smelling cells infested with mice and insects. They were denied even the comfort of wide and spacious folds such as are enjoyed by cattle in their enclosures.

But the worst and most revolting feature of the Roman attitude towards these slaves was represented by what formed their best-loved diversion Which, by the way, also brings into light the innate, barbarous and inhuman character of the Roman civilization - the civi lization which is in modem times represented by modern Europe and America with all the means of imperialistic exploitation at their disposal. The slaves carrying swords and lances were led out into the arenas with their masters and occasionally the emperor himself seated around exalted seats in order to watch them fight, in dead earnest, for their diversion. The slaves fell upon one another with their swords and spears, recklessly hacking themselves to pieces. The climax was reached when someone of the fighters killed a fellow-slave and threw him cold and lifeless on the ground. At this he was lustily applauded with loud hurrahs, vigorous hand clapping and joyous, hearty laughter.

This was how the slaves fared in the Roman world. We need not dwell upon their legal position in this set-up: the absolute right of the master to kill, punish or exploit them mercilessly without any right on their part, to complain even, and without expecting any moral support whatever from any quarter, as it would add little to our knowledge after going over all that we have in brief described above.

The slave was no better off than this in Persia, India and other countries. Despite all their minor differences the fate of the slave remained the same among all these nations: his life had no worth, his murder no retaliation, he was burdened with cumbersome obligations carrying with them little or no rights in return. The systems prevalent in these countries differed neither in intent nor ill content with regard to the slaves: they differed merely in the degree or intensity of their cruelty and hideousness which they betrayed in their attitudes towards slaves.

Such were the conditions of life that obtained when Islam arrived on the scene. Its advent heralded the restoration of human dignity to these slaves. It told the masters as to their slaves:

بَعْضُكُمْ مِنْ بَعْضٍ

"...you are (sprung) the one from the other ...” (An-Nisaa, 4:25)

It proclaimed that:

"He who kills his slave, we shall kill him; who mutilates his nose, we shall cut his nose; and who gelds our slave, We shall get him gelded in return.”

It recognized a common, descent abode as well as return for all men, master and slave alike, saying;

"You are all sons of Adam and Adam was created from dust."

And stressed that there was no superiority for a master over his slave merely because of his being a master: whatever superiority there was, it rested on piety:

"There is no superiority for an Arab, or for a black man over a red one, or for a red over a black man save due to piety."

Islam came and told the masters that they should be fair and good in their dealings with the slaves:

وَبِالْوَالِدَيْنِ إِحْسَانًا وَبِذِي الْقُرْبَىٰ وَالْيَتَامَىٰ وَاعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ وَلَا تُشْرِكُوا بِهِ شَيْئًاوَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَالْجَارِ ذِي الْقُرْبَىٰ وَالْجَارِ الْجُنُبِ

وَالصَّاحِبِ بِالْجَنْبِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ وَمَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ

اإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ مَنْ كَانَ مُخْتَالًا فَخُورً

"And serve Allah and do not associate any thing with Him and be good to the parents and to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the neighbor of (your) kin and the alien neighbor, and the companion in a jo11rney and the wayfarer and those whom your right hands possess; surely Allah does not love him who isproud, boastf ul..." (An-Nisaa’, 4:36)

It stressed the fact that true relationship between master and slave was not one of slavery and over-lordship, nor of subjection or objection but that of kinship and brotherhood. Thus the masters were permitted to marry the slave-girls they had in their possession:

وَمَنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِعْ مِنْكُمْ طَوْلًا أَنْ يَنْكِحَ الْمُحْصَنَاتِ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ فَمِنْ مَا بِإِيمَانِكُمْ أَعْلَمُ وَاللَّهُ ۚ مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ مِنْ فَتَيَاتِكُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ

فَانْكِحُوهُنَّ بِإِذْنِ أَهْلِهِنَّ وَآتُوهُنَّ بَعْضُكُمْ مِنْ بَعْضٍ ۚ

أُجُورَهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ

"And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) of those whom your right hands possess from among your believing maidens; and Allah knows best your faith: you are (sprung) the one f rom the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters, and give them their dowries justly…” (An-Nisaa’, 4:25)

Thus the masters were described as brothers to their slaves by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.):

"Your slaves are your brothers ...so he who has a brother under him should feed him and clothe him as he himself feeds and dresses; do not ask them to do things which are beyond their power and if you do ask them to do such things then help them."

With a mark of deference to the feelings of the slaves the Holy Prophet added: "None of you should say: This is my slave and this is my slave-girl. He should rather say: This is my man and this is my maiden."

It was on this authority that Abu Huraira, on seeing a man riding a horse and his slave trudging along after him, said to the man: "Get him seated on the horse behind you, for, surely he is your brother, and his soul is similar to yours."

This was, however, not all that Islam did for the slaves, but before proceeding with our inquiry, we would first like to sum up the great advance that, thanks to Islam, came about in the position of the slave at this preliminary stage.

The slave was now no longer regarded just a commodity - a merchandize - but was looked upon as a human being with a soul similar to that of his master, whereas in the past be was regarded as a being quite different from his master, and created to serve as a slave in every way fit to suffer humiliation.

It was because of this notion that their conscience never twinged them when murdering, punishing, cauterizing, or making their slaves perform loathsome and burdensome jobs. Islam raised them from this state of abject slavery to the exalted status of brotherhood with free men. These achievements of Islam were not mere professions but a fact to which history bears witness.

Even the prejudiced writers of Europe admit that in the early period of Islam the slave was exalted to such a noble state of humanity as was never before witnessed in any other part of the world, They won so dignified a status within the Muslim community as made the freed slaves abhor betraying their erstwhile masters although now they stood in no need or fear of them and were now as free as they. The reason for this lay in the fact that they considered themselves to be members of the family of their previous masters and linked to them with ties akin to those of blood.

Also the slave now came to be regarded as a human being whose personal safety was guaranteed by law not permitting the commission of any transgression against him through word or act. As to the word, the Prophet forbade the Muslims to talk of their slaves as such and instead commanded them to address them in a manner that should make them think of themselves as members of their family, and blot out from their persons the stigma of slavery. With this in view he said:

"Surely God has made you their masters: and if He had willed He could have likewise given you in their possession as slaves."

This means that it was the particular conditions and circumstances that had made them slaves; otherwise they were as good as their masters. In this way, Islam deflated a little the swollen pride of the masters along with raising the status of slaves so as to connect them all in a purely human relationship. It brought them closer and fostered love among them telling them that love and nothing else should form the basis of all their mutual relationships.

In the case of physical harm or injury, for both of them a kindred punishment was explicitly laid down. "He who slays his slave we shall put him to death, " is a principle very clear in its vast implications, all of which go to show that a state of perfect equality prevailed between the slave and his master as between one man and another, besides guaranteeing to both of them the right to live as human beings. Thus Islam made it clear that the presen t situation slavery - did not preclude them from their rights as human beings,

These guarantees were not only quite sufficient to grant a slave his safety and security of life but were also so generous and noble that no other parallel in the whole history of slave laws exists at all either before or after the advent of Islam. In this respect, Islam went to such an extent that it forbade the master to even slap his slave, except for the purpose of correction (which has its own prescribed limits that may neither be passed by nor overlooked under any circumstances, the punishment given being, however, similar to the punishment the master may award his own children on their mischief). This also provided a legal justification for setting the slaves at liberty. And with this we pass on to the next stage - the stage of actual enfranchisement.

In the first stage, Islam gave spiritual enfranchisement to slaves. It gave them back their humanity and taught that from the stand point of a common origin they enjoyed a status similar to that of their masters and that it was the external circumstances alone that had deprived them of their freedom, preventing them thereby from participating directly in the social life of the community. But for this only point of difference, there was no other difference between slaves and masters as far as their rights as human beings were concerned.

But Islam did not stop short there as the great fundamental principle of it is the achievement of perfect equality among all men making everyone of them equally free. Therefore it proceeded to bring about the actual freedom of the slaves by two important means: (1) voluntary emancipation by the masters (Al ltq) and (2) writing of their freedom (Mukatabah).

(1) As to the first of these (i.e. Al ltq) it was a voluntary act on the part of the master to set a slave at liberty. The practice was greatly encouraged by Islam and the Holy Prophet himself in this regard too provided the best example for his followers.

He freed all the slaves he had. His companions followed his example, Abu Bakr in particular, spending large sums of money on buying off slaves from the idolatrous chiefs of Quraish to set them free later on. Besides this the slaves were also bought out of the Public Exchequer whenever there was some money to spare for this purpose so as to set them free.

Yahya bin Saeed says: "Umar bin Abdul Aziz sent me to collect alms from Africa. I collected the alms and then looked for the poor to distribute the alms among them but I found none, nor I found anyone who might have accepted these from me, for Umar bin Abdul Aziz had enriched the people. So I bought a slave with the money and then set him free." The Holy Prophet used to free a slave who would teach reading and writing to ten Muslims or render any other kindred service to the Muslim Community.

The Quran enjoined that atonement for some of the sins consisted in freeing of slaves as also the Holy Prophet encouraged it for the reparation of any other sin one might commit. This contributed more than anything to bring liberty to the greatest number of slaves, for no man could hope to be wholly free from sin as the Holy Prophet said: ''All sons of Adam are sinners". It may be well to point out here one of the atonements prescribed by Islam for sins, as it in particular i llustrates the standpoint of Jslam with regard to slavery. Islam prescribed that redemption for the killing of a believer by mistake was the freeing of a believing slave and paying blood money to his people:

وَمَا كَانَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ أَنْ يَقْتُلَ مُؤْمِنًا إِلَّا خَطَأً

وَمَنْ قَتَلَ مُؤْمِنًا خَطَأً فَتَحْرِيرُ رَقَبَةٍ

وَدِيَةٌ مُسَلَّمَةٌ إِلَىٰ أَهْلِهِ إِلَّا أَنْ يَصَّدَّقُوا

فَإِنْ كَانَ مِنْ قَوْمٍ عَدُوٍّ لَكُمْ

"And it does not behoove a believer to kill a believer except by mistake, and whoever kills a believer by mistake, he should free a believing slave, and blood-money should be paid to his people unless they remit it as alms..." (An-Nisaa’, 4:92)

The murdered man killed by mistake was a human being of whose services his people as well as the community were deprived without any legal justi fication, for which reason Islam prescribed that a compensation should be made to both parties: his people and the society: his people getting a just blood money and the society another man to serve it in his place i.e., the newly freed believing slave.

Thus the freeing of a slave meant bringing back to life a human being as a compensation for the one who was lost due to his being killed by mistake. As is clear from this, Islam views slavery as death or a state very much similar to it notwithstanding all those securities that it did provide for a slave.That is why it eagerly snatched every opportunity to resuscitate this wretched class of human beings by restoring to them their liberty.

History tells us that such large numbers of slaves achieved their freedom through this voluntary emancipation (Al ltq) in Islam as have no other para llel in the history of any other nation, before or after Islam till modem times, besides the fact that the factors that contributed towards this emancipation were purely humane springing up from Musl ims' sincerest wish to win. their God's pleasure by freeing the slaves they possessed.

(2) The second means whereby Islam brought freedom to slaves was that of Mukatabah i .e. the writing of freedom to a sJave on his asking for it by the master in return for a certain amount of money agreed upon by both of them. The master could in such a case neither refuse nor delay the freeing of a slave ready to ransom his freedom: he must set him at liberty on the receipt of the ransom. Otherwise the slave could move the court to decree his enfranchisement.

By this institution of Mukatabah, Islam paved the way for the freedom of all those slaves who happened to desire their freedom and not passively wait for their masters' goodwill or piety to set them at liberty at their own convenience.

From the moment a slave offered to ransom h is freedom, not only his master could not turn down the offer, but there was also no need for him to fear any repercussions, for the Islamic government guaranteed that he would henceforth work for his master in return for a fixed payment, or it would make arrangements for him to work outside for anyone else on hire till the time he is able to collect the money needed for winning back of his freedom.

This was what happened in Europe aftetwards in the fourteenth century, that is Some seven centuries after Islam had already enforced it in its domain, The great distinguishi ng feature of Islam that can hardly be looked for anywhere else, was the financial aid the Islamic government advanced to slaves such as wou ld demand the wri ting of their freedom out of the Publ ic Exchequer. This was a clear manifestation of the great interest Islam had in the voluntary emancipation of slaves without expecting any material gains in return, merely wi th a view to securing God's pleasure and fulfilling one 's obligations as a slave towards Him, The Quranic verse describing the uses of Zakat says:

إِنَّمَا الصَّدَقَاتُ لِلْفُقَرَاءِ وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَالْعَامِلِينَ عَلَيْهَا وَالْمُؤَلَّفَةِ قُلُوبُهُمْ

وَفِي الرِّقَابِ وَالْغَارِمِينَ وَفِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ

وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ مِنَ اللَّهِفَرِيضَةً

"Alms are only for the poor and the needy, and the officials (appointed) over them, and those whose hearts are made to incline (to truth) and the (ranson1ing of) captivel· and those in debts and in the way of Allah and the wayfarer; an ordinance from Allah; and Allah is knowing, Wise."(At-Tawbah, 9:60)

Thus the Quran laid it down that Zakat should be spent for purchasing the freedom of such slaves as were unable to work out their own liberty with the help of their personal earnings.

These two institutions in Islam signified a great practical advancement achieved by Islam in the history of slavery. It forestalled the normal historical advancement of mankind by at least seven centuries besides featuring some quite new ingredients of advancement such as security afforded by the state to the slave - something rare in the history of mankind till modern times - and others which mankind is far from having yet realized i.e. the noble and generous treatment of slaves, or freeing them of one's own free will without any external pressure of economic or political developments such as at last forced the peoples of Europe to grant freedom to slaves.

These two things are sufficient to confute the false assertions of the communists, who claim that all systems including Islam represent but a particular stage in the economic development of mankind. Faithful to the law of dialectical materialism thus Islam too with all its beliefs and views came at a time best suited for it, reflecting the economic and material conditions of the period, for a system may, according to them only reflect the economic life but can by no means anticipate a future economic stage.

They insist that this theory cannot be false as it has been testified by the reason of the one who "can neither be influenced with falsehood from above nor from below " - the reason of Karl Marx , the most exalted and blessed one! But the bottom is knocked out of this falsehood by Islam - standing refutation of all this Marxist humbug, for it did not work up its way in the manner Marx prescribed, inside the Arabian Peninsula, nor outside it all the world over, and this is true not only with regard to the life of slaves under Islam but is equally tenable in its manner of distributing wealth, in determining the mutual relationship of the ruler and the ruled, and of a master's to his hireling.

On the other hand, Islam raised its whole social and economic superstructure on voluntary obedience of such a style as in many ways still remains unsurpassed and unmatched in the history of social systems.

Here a very perplexing question may haunt some persons: Why is it that Islam - so great a champion of slave emancipation and taking such radical steps towards that end voluntarily and without any outside pressure or coercion before all the world did not also take the final and decisive step, and abolish it once for all , as it migh t have in that way immensely benefited mankind besides proving thereby that it was really a system most perfect and in effect revealed by God, Who dignified the sons of Adam over many of His creations?

For an answer to this question we need must inquire into the allied social, psychological and political problems of slaver - the reasons due to which Islam delayed its much expected and outright abolition. We must also during this inquiry bear in mind that actually the abolition of slavery was rather delayed more than Islam would have desired or allowed it if it had continued functioning properly in its pristine purity, unadulterated by extraneous ingredients of deviation.

In the first place then it must be recorded that when Islam came, slavery was prevalent throughout the world as an acknowledged fact of socio-economic existence. There was hardly a man to be met with who was repelled by it, or who felt any need for a change. As such the changing or the total discarding of it required a gradual process stretched over a long period of time.

Thus we see that prohibition of liquor was effected not immediately but after years of preparation although it before all other things constituted a mere individual habit, notwithstanding the fact that it carried so many social implications as well and that some Arabs pract iced abstinence even in the days of ignorance believing it a vice degrading for a truly noble man.

But slavery was looked upon by them as something quite different. It was deep-rooted in the social structure of the time as well as the psychology of the individuals, it entailed individual as well as social and economical implications and, as we observed above, nobody regarded its existence as something undesirable, that is why its abolition required a period of time far longer than the life of the Holy Prophet, the period which coincided with the period of Divine revelation through him.

God, the best knower of all that He created, knew that the total prohibi tion of wine would be achieved after a few years by a mere commandment. So He did command its prohibi tion when such time came. Similarly, if the conditions of life had been such as a mere direction were to suffice to suppress the evil of slavery, God Almighty would have expressly forbidden it once for all without any further delay.

When we say that Islam is a religion for all mankind and for all times, and that it embraces in itself all the healthy elements necessary for the existence and continuance of good life, we do not at all mean that it has once for all laid down all the detailed rules for all times and climes. No, that is not so, for it has given such detailed directions only with regard to those basic human problems that remain unaltered through all the different vicissitudes of history, for the roots of these problems lie deep in the unchangeable, instinctive headsprings of human nature.

As to the ever-changing conditions of life, Islam is content with laying down some general principles for them so as to outline their future course of development. This is precisely what it did with respect to the problem of slavery. It laid down a sound basis for the freeing of slaves through voluntary enfranchisement or by the ransoming of their freedom besides pointing out the course to a permanent resolution of this old and complicated problem in future.

Islam did not mean to change human nature. It rather sought to civilize it making due allowance for its inevitable limitations so as to help it ascend the highest possible planes of perfection without any recourse to suppression or repression. It recorded a miraculous success in transforming some individuals. As regards human society as a whole its success was no less glorious: it bears no analogy to anything else ever achieved in the domain of human history. But despite all this it did not aim at transmuting human beings to a degree of perfection both rare as well as impossible in the practical life of human beings with all their present human limitations. For, if God had intended that, He would have from the very first created men like angels and as such ordered them to bear burdens that can be borne by angels only, of whom it is said that:

لَا يَعْصُونَ اللَّهَ مَا أَمَرَهُمْ

وَيَفْعَلُونَ مَا يُؤْمَرُونَ

"...they do not disobey Allah in what He commands them, and do as they are commanded.” (At-Tahrim, 66:6)

God did not intend to transmute men into angels such as these. He rather made them men and as such He knows their potentialities and the time necessary for their flourishing so as to enable them to follow and successfully execute an order.

However it is quite sufficient for Islam to be the first to initiate the emancipation movement which took the world some seven centuries to adopt and enforce. The fact nonetheless is that Islam had before long practically put an end to slavery in the Arabian Peninsula and but for the presence of a new headspring of slavery due to which slavery lingered on everywhere in the world, it was quite capable of undertaking in earnest its similar effacement in the whole world of Islam.

In the presence of this new cause of servitude it was not possible for Islam to abolish it outright, for it concerned not only the Muslims, but their opponents as well on whom Islam exercised no control or power. The source that thus prevented the total effacement of slavery was war, the most fruitful source of slavery at the time. We would discuss it shortly in some detail.

In treating slaves well and restoring their human status Islam has left behind some most wonderful and admirable examples. Of these we have already referred to some of the Quranic verses and traditions of the Holy Prophet, Here we would in brief take some more examples from practical life in the early period.

When in Medina, the Holy Prophet established brotherhood between some Arab chiefs and some freed slaves. Thus he joined as brothers Bilal son of Rabah and Khalid son of Ruwaihata Al-Khasami; Zaid, the freed slave of the Prophet, and Hamza, the uncle of the Prophet; and Kharijah son of Zaid and Abu Bakr. This relationship of brotherhood was a real bond akin to blood-relationship, so much so that the two persons thus made brothers inherited from each other just as only the blood relations now do.

But Islam did not stop at that. It went a step farther. Thus the Prophet married away his cousin Zainab, daughter of Jahash, to his ex-slave Zaid. But marriage touches a very delicate aspect of a person's life especially in that of a woman. Therefore, although Zainab accepted a man far below her in social status, she could not reconcile herself to be the wife of one who did not come of a noble family like her, nor possessed wealth. But the Holy Prophet did by this act set an example to show that a slave could attain to the highest level of a Quraishite chief from out of the abyss of ignominy into which he was hurled by his cruel fellow human beings.

But still this did not satisfy Islam. Slaves were exalted to the position of military commanders and leaders. Thus when the Holy Prophet sent out an army which consisted of the closest of the Companions - Emigrants and Helpers, the acknowledged leaders of the Arabs - he entrusted Zaid, the slave, with the generalship of the army. After the death of Zaid the Holy Prophet appointed his son, Usatnah as the commander of the army consisting of such illustrious men as Abu Bakr and Umar, his two principaJ ministers and afterwards successors.

Thus slaves were given not only a status equal and similar to others but were at the same time raised to the exalted positions of heading the armies of free men. In this regard the Holy Prophet went to such a great length that he is reported to have commanded the believers:

"Hear and obey (the orders of your leaders) although the man appointed above you as your leader be a negro slave with a raisin-like head so long as he continues to enforce among you God's law. "

Thus even a slave could aspire to the highest office in the Islamic state. When faced with the problem of appointing his successor, Umar said: Had Saalim, the slave of Abi Huzaifah been alive, l would have appointed him caliph."2 This was just a continuation of the tradition founded by the Holy Prophet.

Umar's life affords yet another admirable instance bearing upon the respect enjoyed by slaves in the Muslim society. When he was vehemently opposed by Bilal, son of Rabah, an ex-slave, concerning the problem of conquered lands Umar despairing of all other means of silencing his opposition prayed to God: "My God! Requite me with Bilal and his comrades!" What a reaction for a caliph in the face of opposition by one of ex-slaves from among his subjects.

The great superiority of Islam with regard to slavery is manifest in various aspects. It aimed at freeing slaves externally as well as internally, but to achieve that end it did not merely rely upon the pious wishes as Abraham Lincoln had done by issuing an order without preparing slaves mentally. This demonstrates Islam's deep understanding of human nature and how it employed all possible means to achieve its objective.

It not only liberally restored these people's liberty but also trained them so as to safeguard it and bear responsibilities flowing from it. It infused a spirit of love and cooperation throughout the society. It did not wait till conflicts should break out within the society over these rights as had happened in Europe leaving behind them an odious legacy of bitter malice and hatred and sapping all the spiritual headsprings in human heart. In the end, let us now take up the main basis on which Islam worked out the final emancipation after a due process of spiritual elevation of slaves.

We have already pointed out that Islam successfully put an end to all those old sources whence slavery sprang up save one which it was virtually impossible for it to do away with, and that was war, the only effective source of this evil left behind after the crusade of Islam against it. We propose to deal with it at some length.

The principal practice that dated back to the remotest past and was prevalent at the time was that prisoners of war were either enslaved or put to death.3 It was a practice such as had with the passage of time come to stay as a necessary condition of human existence in those past ages.

It was against this social background that Islam was revealed to mankind. Many batt es took place between the forces of Islam and its opponents. The Muslims taken prisoners in these wars were made slaves by their captors. Their liberties were forfeited. Men were exposed to oppression and all those miseries that were commonly the lot of a slave at the time.

The honor of woman was violated in a most flagrant manner; several men - fathers. sons and friends - all jointly shared a single captive woman with no regard whatever to any rule or law, or respect for her womanhood, or any consideration whatever about her being a virgin maid or a married woman. Besides this, the chi ldren, if captured, were brought up in a most odious and abject servitude.

As the conditions stood it was not possible for Islam to forthwith set at liberty all the prisoners falling in its hands from the camp, for it would have not only been a piece of bad policy but would have also implied a virtual encouragement to its enemies especially as the Muslims as well as their dear and near ones captured in war were being made slaves by the enemies and exposed to all sorts of tortures, atrocities and humiliations.

In such circumstances, the best and the only course left open to Islam was to treat them as captives as they treated the Muslims. The enslaving of the prisoners of war could not be abolished unilaterally by Islam when the enemies insisted on its continuance. So the practice was tolerated just so long as there did exist no alternative to it and till the time the people all over the world should agree among themselves upon a basis other than that of slavery in dealing with their prisoners of war. We must not also overlook the great difference between Islam and other religions in their wars or the treatment of the prisoners captured in these wars.

Wars have been and stiII are a melee of treachery, surprise, violence; and the enslavement of one nation to another due to its expansionist designs and the lust for exploitation in order to advance its own selfish ends. Such wars are and have been the outcome of personal ambition, pride, vanity or a wish for vengeance of a king or a military commander. Motivated as these wars were by low earthly designs, the people captured therein were made slaves not because of their creed or ideal nor because they were inferior in their physical, psychological or intell ectual equipment to that of their captors, but simply because they had lost the battle and belonged to the vanquished party.

Moreover, there was nothing that could in the event of war, prevent a victorious party to subject the conquered people to humiliation and disgrace, violate their honor, raze peaceful cities to the ground and put women, children as well as old men to sword, - a logical sequence to lack of a lofty ideal, principle or creed to guide them.

With the advent of Islam all these practices were abolished. It prohibited all wars save the one fought in the way of God; to avert cruelty and injustice to Muslims; crush a tyrannous oppressor resorting to force and violence to prevent people from embracing true religion; or to remove a powerful but iniquitous impostor interposing between men and their God incapacitating them to see or hear and follow the truth independently. Thus the Holy Quran declared:

وَقَاتِلُوا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ وَلَا تَعْتَدُوا

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ الْمُعْتَدِينَ

"And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.” (Al-Baqarah, 2: 190)

And:

وَقَاتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّىٰ لَا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ وَيَكُونَ الدِّينُ كُلُّهُ لِلَّهِ ۚ

"And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah ...” (Al-Anfaal, 8:39)

The message of Islam thus becomes a message of peace, which none can dare ignore:

قَدْ تَبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ ۚ لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ ۖ

"There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error.” (Al-Baqarah, 2:256)

That there are even today Christians and Jews in the Muslim world who follow their respective religions unchecked bears testimony to the irrefutable fact that Islam does not approve of using force in converting men to its own viewpoint.

If people accept this message of Islam and agree to follow the truth, the hostilities between them and the Muslims cease forthwith. They become part of the Muslim community and are not to be put to subjection or humiliation.

They enjoy rights similar to those enjoyed by other Muslims, for no distinction is permissible between one Muslim and the other, nor had any Arab any superiority over a non-Arab except due to his piety. In the case of people who refused to adopt Islam as their religion but were desirous to live under its protection with their own religion, Islam did not compel them to adopt its creed but gladly undertook to protect them in return for a special tax (Jizya) with the understanding that all such taxes would be paid back to them in the event of Muslims proving unable to defend them against outside aggression.4 And that despite the belief of Islam that it, was a creed far superior to and better than the one it had undertaken to protect. But if people reject their superiority in material wealth and arms, only then and against these people it is that war is declared. But even such a war is not plunged in without a formal ultimatum or declaration as a last effort to prevent bloodshed if possible and spread peace the world over:

وَإِنْ جَنَحُوا لِلسَّلْمِ فَاجْنَحْ لَهَا وَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ

"And if they incline to peace, then incline to it and trust in Allah ...” (Al-Anfaal, 8:61)

Such then is the story of the wars of Islam which sprang out of its wish to direct mankind to the right path if all peaceful means towards that end should prove ineffective. They were not motivated by any ambition to exploit or vanquish people by any military commander, for they were, in a word, wars waged in the way of God.

Not only this but clear injunctions and rules were also laid down for the conduct of these wars. The Holy Prophet admonishing the Muslims said:

"Go in the name of God to fight in the way of God,· kill him who rejects God,·fight but do not commit a perfidy, nor mutilate, nor kill a child".

Also no man except he who carried arms against the Muslim army was to be killed. Nothing was to be destroyed or ruined, nor anybody's honor violated. No mischief or evil was to be encouraged, for

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ الْمُفْسِدِينَ

"Surely God does not love the mischief-makers. " (Al-Qasas,28:77)

History bears witness that the Muslims upheld all these noble traditions in their wars against their enemies, including even those they had to fight against their treacherous opponents, the Crusaders. The Christians when in possession of Jerusalem committed all sorts of iniquity and transgression against the Muslims living in the city.

They violated their honor and recklessly put them to sword. Even the great mosque there did not escape from their transgression. But when the Muslims captured the city, they did not try to seek revenge against them although they were permitted by God to pay the transgressors back in their own coins. Instead, they chose a course such as to this day remains unsurpassed in generosity and nobility.

This constituted the great fundamental distinguishing mark as to their war-aims and traditions between the Muslims and non-Muslims. Islam could very easily adopt the view that all those who insisted on their despicable idol-worship and actively fought against Truth and Light were half-human and thus fit for being held in bondage only, for how could people not defective in their intellectual or human make-up refuse Light and Truth? And that, therefore, they neither deserved respect, nor the freedom which is the privilege of human beings only.

But Islam did not adopt this course. It did not allow taking prisoners of war in servitude on the plea that they were sub­humans. They were taken slaves just because their people too treated the captured Muslims as their slaves. The problem of slavery was thus left by Islam undecided till all the belligerents should agree to a principle other than that of slavery in dealing with their prisoners of war, for, as the conditions stood, this was the only guarantee against the non-Muslims' ill-treatment of their Muslim prisoners or subjecting them to misery and humiliation without any fear of retaliation.

At this price it must also be mentioned in passing that the only Quranic verse touching upon the fate of prisoners of war says that:

فَإِمَّا مَنًّا بَعْدُ وَإِمَّا فِدَاءً حَتَّىٰ تَضَعَ الْحَرْبُ

"...and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates."(Muhammad, 47:4)

It does not mention the enslaving of prisoners, which would have enforced it as a permanent rule of war, what it explicitly laid down is rather the ransoming or setting them free as a favor, for it is these two that the Quran prescribed as a permanent law of war, Thus if the

Muslims held the prisoners of war in slavery it was purely an act of policy dictated by the force of circumstances. It does not form intrinsic principle of the Islamic law.

But despite this the practice generally followed in Islam did not insist on taking prisoners of war as slaves. If peace was restored, they were never made slaves. The Holy Prophet set at liberty some of the Meccan prisoners captured in the battle of Badr, in return for a redemption, while he freed the others as a mark of favor.

Similarly, he accepted Jizya from the Christian deputation of Najran and returned their prisoners over to them. All these noble deeds were meant to serve as precedents for mankind when once it should be able to shake off the odious legacy of its past and be ready to treat the prisoners of war as human beings.

We may also add that the prisoners fallen in the hands of Muslims in wars were never ill-treated, tortured or subjected to the humiliation such as described above, They, on the other hand, found that if they chose the way to freedom lay open before them provided also that they were ready to bear the responsibilities that go with freedom. If they fulfilled these conditions they were set free, although most of them were bondsmen before falling into the hands of the Muslims, and comprised of slaves seized by Persians and Romans, and packed off to fight against the Muslims.

As far as the women were concerned, Islam respected them even in their captivity even if they were taken prisoners from foreign enemy lands. No one was allowed to violate their honor or treat them merely as a part of booty captured in war. They were no longer to be treated as a common property of all with every man having free access to them to gratify his animal passions. They were hence forth to belong to their masters alone.

None else could establish sexual relations with them. Moreover, they were, like men, granted the right to work out their freedom through Mukatabah, besides providing that a slave-maid would be free the moment she gave birth to a child by her master. Besides the mother, the child would also be deemed free. The treatment given them by Islam on the whole during their captivity was equally noble and generous.

Such is the story of slavery in Islam - a story which constitutes one of the brightest pages of human history. Islam never approved of slavery in principle as it strove hard with all the different means at its disposal to eliminate slavery once for all. It tolerated its existence for the tiine being just because it had no other alternative for it concerned not only Muslims but those peopl e as well who were not under its direct control. They held the Muslims in servitude making them suffer the worst possi ble forms of humiliation and miseries which drove the Muslims to adopt with respect to these people a course of like treatmen t, at least in treating their prisoners of war as slaves though not in their actual transactions with these slaves afterwards.

Islam could not effect the abolition of slavery so long as the world did not agree to put an end to the only source of slavery enslavement of prisoners of war. So when that concord was achieved Islam welcomed it as it formed the unalterable fundamental principle of its polity: liberty for all, equality for all.

As to the instances of slavery, slave-traffic, seizure and sale of Muslims met with in some latter periods of Islamic history without any regular religious wars having taken place, they have no relation whatsoever to Islam. They can with no more justification and truth be imputed to Islam than the vicious crimes and guilt that are perpetrated by some Muslim rulers in the name of Islam at the present times.

In this respect we would do well to bear the following in mind:

(l) The governments in the latter stages of history encouraged and tolerated slavery in several ways without any genuine need. They were motivated by their lust for power and conquest, one nation or class of people holding another nation or class of people in subjection. The other forms of slavery sprang up from causes such as poverty, birth into a certain class held as inferior and the fact that a man worked as a tenant on a particular tract of land. Islam stood for the abolition of all these forms of slavery except that one and the only form of it, which, due to the unfavorable circumstances, it could not effectively check. Slavery was tolerated till such time as the circumstances should grow ripe and favor its abolition.

(2) Despite the fact that in Europe slavery prevailed in so many forms without any genuine need, the Europeans in fact did never abolish it even when they at last condescended to ban it. European writers themselves confess that in fact slavery in Europe came to an end only when due to their economic difficulties, lack of will to exert themselves and their incapacity to work, the slaves became more of an economic liability than an asset to their masters. The master had to spend far larger amounts of money on the sustenance and supervision of their slaves than the profits they got back as a result of their exertion.

It was thus a purely economic factor just a matter of profit and loss - that heJped in bringing about the liberation of these European slaves and as such it bears no analogy to the lofty ideal that respected every man for his humanity and which was inspired by that lofty concept of humanity restored to the slave his freedom. The freedom thus won by the slave in Europe sinks into insignificance when viewed in the context of those successive revolutions that broke out there as a result of the restlessness among slaves and which in the end made it impossible for their masters to hold them any longer in subjection.

All these series of revolutions could not, however, help the slaves in winning back their liberty. They were rather as a result of these revolutions bound all the more securely, for henceforth they were held in serfhood bound to the soiI they ti I led and changed masters on the sale or transfer of land. The slave could not leave the soil which, if he did, he was declared a fugitive by law, bound in chains, cauterized with fire and returned to his master. This form of slavery continued to exist in Europe till it was finally swept away by the French Revolution in the eighteenth century that is, some eleven hundred years after Islam had already enunciated the principle of emancipation.

We should not be taken in by beautiful names. The French Revolution in Europe and Lincoln in America abolished slavery along with the understanding among the people the world over to suppress it in all its forms but all these were mere names, beautiful ones, of course, for, has slavery been abolished in reality? Isn't tyranny still strutting all the world over in different guises? What is called that which the French did in Algeria? In what other terms can we describe the black crimes of the Americans towards the Negroes there, and the felonies of the English against the colored people of South Africa?

Is not slavery in effect the subjection of a nation to another and the deprivation of a class of people of the rights enjoyed by other men like themselves? It means just that and nothing else. Why should we not then call a spade a spade? Why misname these different forms of slavery as liberty, fraternity, and equality? For, surely the surface decoration is of little value where the crimes perpetrated underneath are of the most monstrous and hideous nature yet witnessed by mankind during their long career on the earth.

Islam was very frank and explicit on what it stood for and advocated. It told the people in a straightforward manner. in clear and unequivocal terms as to what it thought of slavery, that such and such was the real cause of it, this is the way out of it to freedom; and that this is the way to its outright abolition…the way that was for the time being not checked due to the disagreement among the people of the world as to the treatment of their prisoners of war.

But the civilization of modern times is neither so frank nor straightforward with regard to its real aims and methods. It excels in one thing only: in painting its exterior in the brightest of colors, elegant outwardly but dark and gloomy from within. It killed hundreds of thousands of people in Tunis, Algeria and Morocco just because they demanded their freedom and human dignity; freedom to live in their respective homelands without any intrusion from abroad; the freedom to speak their own tongue, to follow their creed and religion, and to have a free homeland and a direct share in determining their political and economic relations with the rest of the world.

They killed these innocent people, hauled them into loathsome dungeons without food or water, violated their honor, raped their womenfol k . killed them and ripped up their bellies wagering if the child they carried was a male or a female. These monstrous crimes are committed, but the twentieth century hypocritical civilization describes them as the propagation of the principles of liberty, fraternity and equality, whereas Islam 's voluntary, ideal, respectful and generous treatment of slaves thirteen centuries ago, and its declaration that slavery was not a permanent condition of life but only a temporary one, are called backwardness, reactionarism and barbarism!

Similarly, this hypocritical civilization finds nothing shocking if the Americans put on their hotels and public places the notices announcing' "For whites only"; "Blacks and dogs not allowed"; and when a crowd of “civilized" white Americans mercilessly lynch a colored man throwing him on the ground and kicking him round with their boots till he is dead, for he despite being colored had dared succumb to the temptation of having relations with a white American girl, with the initiative, however, coming from her and not from him, while during all this the policemen stand around passively and do nothing to stop them or save one of their compatriots united to them through common bonds of language, religion as well as humanity. They perpetrate all these monstrous crimes and still they remain as “civilized" as ever, and their nation is looked upon as a pinnacle of modrn civilization and progress!

As against this we see that when a Parsee slave threatened Umar with assassination, refused Islam as well as denied to pay Jizya to the Islamic state, they were treated as real antagonists obstinately continuing their hostilities against Islam and turning down its offer for a peaceful agreement. They were the people who took upon themselves to arrest the spread of Truth and Light ruthlessly employing all, Umar did not say anything to the slave although he understood what the threat implied.

The slave was neither imprisoned, nor banished from the country, nor did Umar order his execution on the plea that he belonged to a sub­ human species who out of sheer prejudice and insolence insisted on worshipping falsehood even after he had with his own eyes seen the truth and the light. How vulgar of him and how contemptuous his attitude towards the slave as a man when he on hearing the threat said instead: "The slave has threatened me", and then went his way without in any way curtailing his freedom. He was charged with the assassination of the Caliph only after he did actually commit the heinous crime.

On the other hand, we see that the colored people of Africa are oppressed, killed or, as the English papers put it, are hunted down; and their human rights withheld from them as they have dared realize their human dignity and so demand of the English people their freedom. This is the English justice at its highest and the human civilization at its best! And these precisely are the "'sublime" and "glorious" moral principles on the basis of which Europe claims precedence and dominance over the whole of the world.

But so far as Islam is concerned, it is extremely barbarous and frivolous, for adopting the course of a like-treatment towards its enemies; it allowed the enslaving of prisoners of war temporarily without, however, approving of slavery in principle. It is also very backward; for it never allowed 'man-hunting,' nor did it indulge in the killing of men because of their having a black skin. Far from that, its reactionarism advanced to such an extent that it declared: "Hear and obey even if the one appointed over you be a Negro slave with a raisin-like head".

As far as female slaves were concerned, they constituted a quite different problem.

Islam made it lawful for a master to have a number of slave-women captured in wars and enjoined that he alone may have sexual relations with them and that he might, if he wished, marry anyone of them. Europe abhors this law but at the same time gladly allows that most odious form of animalism according to which a man may have ilicit relations with any girl coming across him on his way to gratify his animal passions without any consideration whatsoever to any law or human dignity. The guilt of Islam in reality is that it did not countenance adultery. That is why the Europeans seem so wroth with it.

The women captured in wars were among other nations forced to lead a shameful and vile life of prostitution, for they had none to take care of or look after them and as their masters' sense of honor was seldom injured by their pursuing such a wicked course of life. Far from it, the masters would often rather force them to it for their own material gains. But lslam, "the reactionary and backward Islam", never countenanced adultery; it rather made efforts to keep society clean of this hideous moral taint.

Therefore, it enjoined that these slave women would belong to their masters only; they were to provide for their maintenance, feed and safeguard them from failing a prey to such a depravation, gratifying their sexual needs along with satisfying their own in a clean, respectable manner.

But the "conscientious" Europe cannot bring itself to countenance this animalism. That is why it approves of adultery extending it all possible support and protection of law and then, not content with that, spreads its cult throughout the world wherever its imperialistic designs would lead it.

The names have changed but the reality behind them remains unchanged: the woman is as slave to the lust of men as ever she was, for is a modern prostitute, despite all her much publicized freedom, really free to reject her customers who have no interest in her save as a means to achieve the gratification of their own animal urge? Is she really a free woman? There is nothing common between this filthy, abominable trade of human bodies and that clean and spiritual bond that ties a maid to her master in Islam.

As against Islam, modem civilization lacks definiteness and clarity of vision. It does, for instance, recognize that prostitution is an institution of slavery, but still insists on its continuance on the plea that it is a "social necessity".

And why do Europeans consider prostitution a "social necessity"?

Prostitution has come to stay as a social necessity in European civilization because a “civilized" European does not want to burden himself by supporting anyone, a wife or children. He wants to have pleasure without the responsibilities that it generally carries with it. Therefore what he seeks is a woman no matter who she is, or what she thinks of him or he of her, for the gratification of his sexual instinct. He wants her body and nothing else. As such he is far from being attached to any particular woman, for he may satisfy his animal passion with any woman walking in the street.

This is the social necessity on the basis of which slavery of women in the modern epoch is justified. However, it is no more than a mere bluff, for it ceases to exist the moment the European man should get rid of his vanity and animal passions and agree to ascend to a higher plane of humanity.

It may also be mentioned here that the civihzed western governments, which at last prohibited prostitution, did not act so out of any respect for the human status of a prostitute as such, nor did they in any way manifest their moral, psychological and spiritual elevation rendering them immune to this crime. It rather sprang out of the fact that these prostitutes had lost all their usefulness, their place having been taken by the common society girls. The crime was no longer regarded as a crime. And the governments just did not feel any need to interfere with the freedom of its citizens.

But still the Europeans have the audacity to blame Islam for its solution of the problem of captive women thirteen hundred years ago declaring that it was just a temporary arrangement and was not meant to perpetuate for ever and notwi hstanding the fact that the system Islam stood for was far more superior and cleaner to that represented by their twentieth century modern civilization, the natural and the most perfect one, according to them that none may dare disown or even think of changing, it being the pinnacle of human civilization and as such destined to last for ever.

We must not be taken in by the ostensible freedom with which these sybaritic modem society girls surrender themselves to others and think that they are free, for we know that there has always been a group of slaves who were glad to surrender their freedom and willingly prefer servitude to freedom. That is what European civilization has, in fact, accomplished. It encourages adultery and moral corruption, be it in the form of traditional prostitution or the presence of the sybarite society girls who willingly surrender themselves to men.

This, in short, is the story of slavery in Europe right up to this twentieth century: slavery of men, women, of whole nations and classes. It was a slavery that sprang up from various new sources and causes; a slavery that was sustained without any real and genuine social need such as thirteen hundred years ago forced Islam to tolerate an inevitable form of it. It was founded in the vileness of European civilization and its innate inhuman character.

We may add a word about slavery under which people of communist countries are groaning. The government is the only master in these countries, all the other people being just slaves to it ever ready to obey orders. Men and women do not even have the freedom to choose their job or the place they would like to work in. They are not more than slaves. A similar situation prevails in the capitalist countries of the West where big capitalists are the virtual masters who wield real power. The working classes are helpless and completely dependent upon them.

The reader may come across the votaries and supporters of one or the other of these systems but he should never be taken in by their loud professions if he would but keep in mind all that we have briefly sketched above. From this he can easily judge for himself if both these systems - capitalism and communism - are anything more than the continuance of all those centuries-old forms of slavery that have been imposed on the people in the name of civilization and social development.

He can also see whether mankind during the last fourteen centuries has continually moved ahead on the path of progress and glory by ignoring the guidance of Islam or has it instead been steadily sinking low going down and down showing thereby how desperately it stands in need of the guidance of Islam to help it get out of the darkness it has long since been plunged in.

Notes

1. Quoted from Muhammad Qutb's Islam the Misunderstood Religion

2. Though the real meaning of the words of Umar is correct and very attractive and important, because from the viewpoint of Islam a slave can take the place of a ruler, this is regarding the matter of Umar's rule. From the viewpoint of Shia, Caliphate (ruling) over Muslims is not a matter of appointment by men themselves - Imamate is divine)

3. On page 2273 of the Historical Encyclopedia called, Universal History of the World we are told that in the year 599 A.O. the Roman emperor Marius, motivated by his love for economy, refused to ransom a few of the millions of those prisoners that had been captured by his forces in wars. He istead put them all without a single exception to sword.

4. History is full of instances such as bear upon this point. But we would mention just two out of Mr. T. W. Arnold's book The Preaching of Islam. (Ashraf’s edition 1965). On page 61 of the book he says: "'Again in the treaty made by Khalid with some towns in the neighborhood of Hirah." he writes (Tabari. the historian): "If we protect you, then Jizya is due to us; but if we do not, then it is not due." He goes on to say that "The Arab general, Abu Ubaidah, accordingly wrote to the governors of the conquered cities of Syria, ordering them to pay back all the Jizya that had been collected from the cities, and wrote to the people saying:

"We give you back the money that we took from you, as we have received news that a strong force is advancing against us. The agreement between us was that we should protect you, and since t his is not now in our power, we return you all tha t we took. But if we are victorious we shall consider ourselves bound to you by the old terms of our agreement."

www.alhassanain.org/english