Pandangan Dunia Islam Tauhidi: Theological Instruction (1-30)

Theological Instruction (1-30):

PANDANGAN DUNIA ISLAM TAUHIDI

by: Ayatullah Muhammad Taqi Misbah Yazdi

Penerjemah :
Ahmad Y. Samantho


Pelajaran Pertama
Konsep Agama

Prinsip-prinsip agama dan cabang-cabangnya:
a) Pandangan dunia dan ideologi
b) Pandangan dunia ilahiah dan pandangan dunia materialistik
c) Agama-agama samawi dan prinsip-prinsipnya.


Konsep Agama

Manfaat buku ini adalah untuk menjelaskan kepercayaan/ keimanan dalam Islam, yang dikenal dalam peristilahan Islam sebagai “Ushul al-diin” (pokok-pokok agama). Sebelum mengkaji masalah ini, sangatlah penting untuk mendefinisikan kata “agama” secara ringkas. Sebuah definisi, dalam konteks ilmu logika, menandai permulaan konseptualisasi.

Kata Arab untuk agama adalah ‘Diin’, dan makna leksikalnya (berdasarkan kamus) adalah : ‘ ketaatan’, ‘pahala’, dan ‘ketundukan’.

Dalam istilah teknis, agama berarti mempunyai satu kepercayaan/keimanan kepada “Sang Maha Pencipta” manusia dan alam semesta. Perbuatan-perbuatan yang ditentukan terkait dengan kepercayaan ini juga termasuk di dalam cakupan istilah agama ini. Mereka yang percaya kepada satu Pencipta, bahkan seandainya pun kepercayaan/keimanan mereka tercampur dengan takhayul dan kejahatan, tetap dianggap sebagai ‘beragama’ (‘religious’). Adapun mereka yang menganggap bahwa alam semesta ini sekedar sebuah kebetulan saja sebagai akibat dari sebab-sebab alami dan material saja, mereka ini disebut kaum ‘materialis”.

Atas dasar inilah maka agama-agama kontemporer dapat dikelompokkan menjadi agama yang benar dan agama yang palsu. Agama yang benar dapat juga disebut sebagai sebuah tradisi, yang membawa kepercayaan yang benar, yang sesuai dengan realitas/kenyataan, dan yang dari padanya memancar berbagai perilaku yang menjelaskan dan menguraikan secara rinci agama dan dikuatkan dengan perasaan menjadi benar dan aman.

Prinsip-prinsip agama dan cabang-cabangnya

Dengan memahami definisi teknis yang diiberikan kepada kata ‘agama’, menjadi jelaslah bahwa agama dapat dikelompokkan menjadi dua komponen utama : 1) Kepercayaan mendasar atau keimanan, yang menjadi pondasi bagi peraturan-peraturan praktis, yang terkait dengan agama dan muncul dari dasar-dasar keimanan.


Bagian ini, yang terkait dengan kepercayaan agama, disebut sebagai “pokok-pokok” (Ushul), 2). dan bagian yang terkait dengan peraturan praktis dikenal sebagai cabang-cabangnya (furu’). Para ulama Islam enggunakan istilah-istilah ini untuk mengenali dua kategori berikut:

a. Pandangan dunia dan Ideology

Pandangan dunia dapat didefinisikan sebagai “serangkaian kepercayaan universal dan harmonis mengenai manusia dan alam semesta”.

Sedangkan ‘Ideologi’ secara umum dapat dimaknai sebagai “serangkaian cara pandang universal dan harmonis mengenai perilaku umat manusia.”

Dengan mempertimbangkan hal di atas maka istilah ‘pandangan dunia’ (‘worldview’) dapat diterapkan kepada “prinsip-prinsip kepercayaan”, dan “ideologi” dapat digunakan dalam kaitannya dengan ‘hal-hal cabang atau peraturan praktis universal’. Walaupun tetap harus dicatat bahwa, pandangan dunia maupun ideologi tidaklah mengandung aspek-aspek partikular dari prinsip-prinsip dan cabang-cabang. Ideologi juga dapat, kadang-kadang, tumpang tindih dengan pandangan dunia dan mengandung makna-makna dari pandangan dunia.

b. Pandangan Dunia Ketuhanan dan Pandangan Dunia Materialis

Melalui berbagai masyarakat manusia yang berbeda-beda, pandangan dunia yang beraneka ragamnya muncul dan eksis. Pandangan-pandangan dunia itu dapat dikelompokkan menjadi “yang berketuhanan (Ilahiyah)” dan “yang materialistik”. Sebuah ‘pandangan dunia ilahiyah’ adalah berdasarkan realitas metafisikal, sementara pandangan dunia materialistik tidak berdasarkan realitas metafisikal.

Di masa lalu, para pengikut pandangan dunia materialistik dikenal sebagai atheis (dahree), naturalis (tabi’ee), dan kadang-kadang disebut sebagai dualists (zindiq) atau pelaku bid’ah (mulhids).

Materialisme zaman kini muncul dalam berbagai bentuk dan ragam, yang paling terkenal adalah ‘materialisme dialektik’, yang dapat disaksikan dalam filsafat Marxisme.

Melalui pelajaran dalam diskusi ini, menjadi jelas nyata bahwa istilah pandangan dunia dan ideologi dapat juga diterapkan dalam konteks non-agama.

c. Agama Samawi dan prinsip-prinsipnya

Ada berbagai pendapat yang berbeda-beda di antara para sosiolog, antropolog, dan sejarahwan agama, berkaitan dengan kemunculan agama. Bagaimana pun juga dari bukti-bukti yang diketemukan di dalam Islam, kemunculan agama adalah dianggap bersamaan dengan kemunculan umat manusia. Manusia pertama di atas muka bumi ini adalah Adam (as), Rasulullah, yang memproklamasikan monotheisme (al Tauhid). Politheisme dan penyimpangan kebenaran yang kita lihat di sekitar kita adalah merupakan akibat dari manusia yang mengikuti hawa nafsunya dan tidak mengikuti pedoman yang benar.

Agama-agama monotheistik (Tauhidi), yang juga dikenal sebagai “agama yang diturunkan dari langit (Samawi)”, mempunyai tiga prinsip umum mendasar:

  1. Beriman/percaya kepada Satu Tuhan
  2. Beriman/percaya kepada kehidupan abadi di akhirat, dan bahawa manusia akan menerima ganjaran atau hukuman terhadap setiap perbuatan yang dilakukannya semasa hidup di dunia.
  3. Beriman/percaya kepada Rasul Utusan Tuhan, yang dikirimkan untuk membimbing umat manusia ke arah kesempurnaan dan ke arah pencapaian kebahagian di dunia dan di akhirat kelak.

Tiga prinsip fundamental ini mempersiapkan jawaban bagi pertanyaan-pertanyaan berikut, yang dapat dipertanyakan oleh orang-orang berakal:
“Siapakah Sang Maha Pencipta?”
“Apakah tujuan akhir penciptaan”
“Dari manakah kita dapat mencari petunjuk agar dapat hidup dengan benar?

Bimbingan tersebut telah menjadi aman melalui turunnya wahyu, dan dikenal sebagai ideologi keagamaan yang telah mewujudkan dirinya di dalam pandangan dunia ketuhanan (illaahi).

Prinsip-prinsip keimanan/kepercayaan agama adalah terdiri dari akibat-akibat wajar, implikasi-implikasi dan detail-detail, yang berbeda-beda yang membawa kepada kemunculan agama yang berbeda-beda, mazhab dan aliran sekte.

Perbedaan dalam keimanan mengenai kenabian, dapat terlihat misalnya dalam prinsip-prinsip Trinitas (sebagai keimanan Kristiani), dan perbedaan dalam kepercayaan terhadap ‘Imamah’(kepemimpinan sosial-politik), yang telah mengarah kepada perbedaan kepercayaan terhadap prinsip-prinsip suksesi (pergantian kepemimpinan atas umat Islam) yang telah memisahkan antara kelompok Sunni dan Syiah.

Point utama yang harus dipertimbangkan adalah monotheisme (Tauhiid); kenabian (Nubuwah), dan hari kebangkitan (Ma’ad), yang merupakan prinsip dasar (fundamental principles) dari semua agama samawi.

Akibat-akibat wajar (corollaries), bagaimanapun juga telah dianggap sebagai satu bagian dari prinsip dasar. Sebagai contoh, kepercayaan terhadap Eksistensi dan kesatuan Tuhan adalah sebuah prinsip dasar. Beberapa ulama Syiah mempercayai bahwa keadilan (‘adl) dapat dianggap sebagai sebuah prinsip yang terpisah, namun dalam kenyataannya hal itu sebenarnya adalah bagian dari prinsip pertama yang telah disebut tadi. Contoh lain adalah bahwa ‘Imamah, yang dianggap oleh beberapa ulama sebagai sebuah prinsip di dalam hak-hak miliknya, sementara kenyataannya hal itu hanyalah kelanjutan dari prinsip kenabian.
Di atas landasan inilah istilah ‘prinsip-prinsip agama’ dapat dikategorikan ke dalam bentuk umum dan bentuk particular. Bentuk umum, ‘prinsip agama’ (ushuludin) berhadapan dengan ‘cabang-cabang’ (furu’din), dan penggunaan partikular istilah-istilahnya adalah untuk sekte particular dan kepercayaan. Bentuk umum juga memasukkan agama-agama samawi lainnya, yang berbagi prinsip-prinsip umum (tauhid, nubuwah, ma’ad).


Pelajaran 2
Pencarian Agama

Dorongan untuk menyelidiki:
a) Pentingnya pencarian agama
b) Ketetapan hati dari sebuah keraguan


Dorongan untuk menyelidiki

Adalah merupakan fitrah manusia untuk mencari dan peduli kepada kenyataan (realitas). Manusia dilahirkan dengan kualitas ini, yang tetap akan ada sampai matinya. Kadang-kadang insting untuk mencari kebenaran mungkin saja dirujuk sebagai sebuah “rasa ingin tahu” (‘sense of curiosity’), di mana manusia terdorong untuk merenungkan masalah-masalah keagamaan dan berbagai macam amal perbuatannya, yang akan menolongnya untuk memahami dan mewujudkan sebuah agama yang benar. Dalam proses perwujudan inilah ia menghadapi berbagai pertanyaan:

· Adakah sebuah wujud yang bukan materi yang tak dapat dilihat dan dipersepsi (ghaib)?
· Jika memang ada, adakah kaitannya antara wujud bukan materi dengan dunia material kita?
· Dalam kehadiran hubungan ini, adakah sebuah Realitas, yang telah menciptakan alam semesta?
· Apakah keberadaan (eksistensi) manusia terbatas hanya pada bentuk/dunia material saja?
· Jika manusia tidak terbatas hanya pada materi/kehidupan dunia, adakah alam yang lain ?
· Dan jika memang ada hubungan antara dua dunia/alam tersebut? Lebih dari itu manusia membutuhkan ilmu pengetahuan mengenai cara terbaik, yang dengannya dia dapat memenuhi kehidupannya dengan kebaikan yang akan menjaminnya hidup bahagia di dunia maupun di akhirat kelak.

Sifat-sifat utama yang dibutuhkan manusia dalam mencari realitas, adalah watak yang intrinsik (hati nurani) dalam dirinya. Keinginan (gairah) manusia, adalah faktor lain yang dapat menantang dan mengukuhkan dia dalam mencari kebenaran. Keinginan / gairah tersebut mungkin tidak selalu bersifat ilahiyah (fitrah), tapi juga mungkin berupa nafsu yang diharapkannya memenuhi kebutuhan dunia dan kekayaan materialistiknya. Hal ini tergantung perjuangannya di dalam lapangan ilmu pengetahuan dan kemajuan ilmu pengetahuan eksperimental. Jika agama agama dapat menyediakan alat bagi manusia untuk mencapai tujuan-tujuan duniawinya tanpa kerugian, hal ini akan mengilhaminya untuk lebih jauh menyelidiki agama, karena adalah merupakan fitrah manusia untuk bergerak ke arah kesuksesan dan mencegahnya dari kegagalan.

Dengan memahami alam realitas yang sangat luas, sukar dan berada di luar jangkauan, manusia melarikan diri dengan memilih alam dunia yang lebih mudah dipahaminya dan bersifat eksperimental. Dia memiliki keraguan apakah dia akan menerima suatu keuntungan dari pencariannya terhadap agama, dan apakah dia akan mendapat suatu hasil pada semua hal yang terkait dengan wataknya yang kompleks dibandingan dengan ilmu pengetahuan yang lebih mudah dicapai, dan terus terang manusia mesti mengenali bahwa menyelidiki suatu masalah selain daripada agama tidak mempunyai nilai subjektif, sementara masalah-masalah keagamaan memiliki nilai yang tertinggi.

Perlu dicatat bahwa ilmu psikologi menghitung bahwa ibadah kepada Tuhan adalah menjadi salah satu fitrah/insting bebas manusia, yang terwujud dari ‘rasa keberagamaan’, yang berjalan sejajar dengan rasa ingin tahu, kebaikan dan keagungan. Sejarah dapat meneguhkan para psikolog dan antropolog, bahwa ibadah kepada Tuhan dalam bermacam-macam bentuknya selalu bergabung bersama jejak langkah manusia. Ini selanjutkan membuktikan bahwa ada sebuah kualitas intrinsic (fitrah) yang ada dalam dirinya.

Fakta bahwa watak fitrah ini adalah inherent atau ada di dalam manusia, tidak selalu berarti bahwa fitrah ini selalu aktif dan bergetar. Fitrah itu harus lebih dulu ditarik kepeduliannya dan kesadarannya di antara manusia ke arah watak alaminya yang benar. Kekurang-pedulian, konsekuensi lingkungan dan pengaruh yang menyesatkan, akan dapat menjatuhkan manusia dari perwujudan watak fitrahnya. Lebih jauh, penyimpangan ini dapat juga terjadi pada insting kita lainnya, yang berakar dari watak yang sangat fitri ini.
Argumentasi untuk pencarian agama dikuatkan dengan insting bebas manusia, yang tidak memerlukan suatu alasan atau pembuktian untuk pertanggungjawabannya.

Bagaimanapun juga, al-Qur’an dan Sunnah Nabi menyediakan kesaksian bahwa agama adalah hal yang fitrah bagi manusia, walaupun kenyataannya bahwa manusia yang bodoh mungkin akan menolak kenyataan ini.

Bahkan manusia itu hendak membuat maksiat terus menerus.

Tidak, Manusia ( yang mengingkari hari kebangkitan dan perhitungan. Sehingga dia) berkeinginan untuk terus berbuat dosa.” (QS Al-Qiyamah, 75: 5)

Jika, manusia tidak menyadari watak fitrahnya, dia akan gagal menyaksikan akibatnya dan akan mengingkari eksistensinya. Fakta inilah yang akan menyediakan pera pembaca dengan pembuktian-pembuktian intelektual berikut ini:

a. Pentingnya pencarian agama

Menjadi sangat jelas bahwa watak fitrah manusia untuk mengetahui realitas dan gairah untuk memenuhi karunia duniawinya adalah daya pendorong bagi perwujudan berbagai sudut pandang manfaat yang berbeda-beda dan penguasaan ilmu pengetahuan.

Dengan melihat kembali kepada sejarah, manusia menjadi peduli bahwa semua manusia terbaik telah menyatakan bahwa mereka telah dikirim oleh Tuhan Sang Maha Pencipta untuk membawa pesan-pesan dan petunjuk bagi umat manusia. Lebih lanjut, untuk penyampaian pesan inilah mereka telah meraih apa-apa yang mereka dapat lakukan dan bahkan telah mengorbankan kehidupan mereka untuk itu.

Di atas landasan itulah, insting alami manusia akan mengilhaminya untuk mencari agama dan untuk merasakan apakah para Rasul dan pesan-pesannya adalah benar dan sesuai dengan penalaran rasional atau tidak. Ketika manusia menyadari bahwa undangan tersebut mencakup kebahagiaan dan kenikmatan abadi, yang berakibat memalingkannya dari dari hukuman dan kerugian, untuk alasan apakah kita tidak akan menyelidiki agama?

Ada kemungkinan bahwa manusia tidak akan memutuskan untuk mengejar pencarian yang sesuai ini, dikarenakan kemalasannya, sikap apatis atau prospek agama yang dianggapnya akan membawa pengekangan yang tak diinginkannya. Dalam kasus ini manusia selayaknya mempersiapkan dirinya untuk menghadapi akibat dari perbuatannya, yang akan berakibat pada azab hukuman yang abadi.

Kondisi orang tersebut, yang tidak tertarik kepada agama, adalah sama seperti anak kecil yang belum dewasa yang sakit, yang merasa takut merasakan obat dan menghindari berdekatan dengan dokter. Anak kecil yang berusia muda tidaklah dapat memperhitungkan keuntungan dan kerugian, namun seorang individu yang peduli dan mempunyai kapasitas intelektual untuk membedakan dan meramalkan hasil akhir, tidak akan menukar kenikmatan duniawi yang sementara ini dengan azab hukuman yang abadi. Al Qur’an menyebutkan orang-orang yang tak peduli telah menukar kerugian abadi dengan kenikmatan duniawi yang sementara, seperti hewan ternak atau bahkan lebih buruk lagi.

“Mereka itu seperti binatang ternak, bahkan mereka lebih sesat lagi. Mereka itulah orang-orang yang rugi.” (QS Al A’raaf, 7: 179)


Dalam contoh lain, Al Qur’an telah menyebutkan :

“Sungguh binatang terburuk dalam pandangan Allah adalah [mereka yang tak mau mendengar dan masa bodoh dan tak mau memahami] orang-orang yang kafir, karena mereka tidak beriman.”

(QS Al Anfaal, 6: 55)

a. Memecahkan keraguan

Adalah mungkin orang-orang tertentu memandang bahwa pencarian agama adalah tidak menguntungkannya, karena hal itu tidak akan dapat memuaskan hawa nafsunya atau memberikan hasil yang cukup. Mereka bagaimanapun juga lebih suka memanfaatkan waktu dan energi mereka untuk mengejar hal-hal yang akan memberikan hasil penuh buah bagi mereka. Untuk menjawab keraguan ini, kita mesti berargumen bahwa pemecahan masalah-masalah keagamaan adalah tidak lebih rendah nilainya dibandingkan dengan ilmu pengetahuan lainnya. Kita juga selalu peduli bahwa pemecahan masalah ilmu pengetahuan dapat menjadi suatu proses yang panjang dan menyeret keluar, oleh karena itu menyelidiki agama tidak dapat mengabaikan landasan yang akan memanfaatkan terlalu banyak waktu dan energi.

Lebih lanjut, kemungkinannya adalah tidak sebanding, hasil dari kemungkinan juga harus menjadi bahan pertimbangan. Sebagai contoh: dalam bisnis ada sekian persen peluang untuk sukses, dan dalam bisnis B punya …persen peluang. Bagaimana pun juga hasil yang tersedia dalam A akan menjadi $…., dan B akan menjadi $…. Karenanya bisnis A adalah 5 kali lebih disukai daripada bisnis B karena keuntungannya yang prospektif (menjanjikan).

Kita dapat menyimpulkan bahwa kemungkinan dari hasil akhir pencarian agama adalah kemanfaatan yang tak terbatas. Bahkan jika hasil akhirnya adalah kepastian, adalah sangat lemah.

Penelitian yang telah dilakukan terhadap masalah keagamaan adalah sangat penting dibandingan penelitian terhadap issue-issue terbatas, tanpa seseorang dapat mencapai kepastian, penyelidikan keagamaan adalah tidak punya point; tapi dapatkah manusia menemukan kepastian tersebut.


Pelajaran 3 :
Kondisi wajib bagi kehidupan umat manusia

· Pendahuluan
· Dorongan untuk melakukan penyelidikan
· Manusia adalah makhluk yang mencari kesempurnaan
a) Kesempurnaan manusia tercapai dengan mengikuti akal (intellectual)
b) Peraturan praktis bagi akal intelek yang dibutuhkan sebagai basis spekulasi,
c) Hasil-hasil yang harus dicapai.


Pendahuluan

Pada pelajaran terdahulu kita telah secara relatif membuktikan kebutuhan untuk mencari agama yang benar, yang disandarkan atas watak intrinsik manusia dan insting fitrahnya untuk mencari keuntungan. Motivasi-motivasi ini dapat diketemukan pada semua manusia yang tidak bias pandangannya dan yang mempunyai kepedulian intuitif terhadap watak alami mereka.

Tujuan kami dalam bab ini adalah untuk membahas masalah yang sama dari sudut pandang yang berbeda dengan pembahasan pendahuluan lebih halus yang berbeda. Hasil akhir dari argumentasi tersebut adalah bahwa jika seseorang tidak menyelidiki agama dan juga tidak memegang pandangan dunia atau ideologi yang benar, mereka tidak akan mencapai kesempurnaan kemanusiaan. Maka sebuah kondisi yang penting bagi kesuksesan kehidupan seseorang adalah memiliki pandangan dunia dan ideologi yang benar.

Hasil-hasil di atas tergantung pada tiga persyaratan berikut:

  1. Manusia secara eksistensial berusaha meraih kesempurnaan.
  2. Kesempurnaan manusia dapat tercapai melalui cahaya aktif kehendak bebas, yang muncul atas perintah akal (hukm al-aql)
  3. Aturan praktis bagi akal diambil di bawah cahaya pemahaman melalui perenungan realitas.

Bagaimanapun juga yang paling penting dari segala realitas tersebut adalah tiga prinsip fundamental pandangan dunia:
a. Keimanan/kepercayaan kepada Tuhan Sang Pencipta,
b. Akhir kehidupan,
c. Sebuah program yang dapat menjamin kesuksesan dalam kehidupan di dunia ini dan di akhirat kelak.

Manusia adalah makhluk yang mengejar kesempurnaan

Seseorang yang peduli kepada watak fitrahnya (instrinsic nature) dan kecenderungan psikologisnya, akan melakukan pencarian sehingga melalui perbuatan-perbuatannya itu memungkinkannya meraih kesempurnaan.

Tidak ada seorang pun yang suka menjadi cacat atau tidak sempurna; dia akan selalu berusaha membuang ketidaksempurnaannya untuk meraih kondisi kesempurnaan. Lebih lanjut ia berusaha menyembunyikan kesalahannya di hadapan orang lain. Gairahnya untuk mengejar kesempurnaan hanya akan efektif jika hal itu diatur melalui latihan-latihan bagi watak fitrahnya, sebagai lawan dari jalan perbuatan yang tidak wajar, yang akan memandu dia ke arah kualitas penyakit-penyakit hati seperti kesombongan, kemunafikan dan pengagungan diri sendiri.

Oleh karena itu dorongan untuk mencari kesempurnaan adalah sebuah elemen fitrah yang bertenaga, yang dapat dirasakan di kedalaman jiwa manusia oleh kesadaran masing-masing orang.

a. Kesempurnaan manusia dicapai dengan mengikuti akalnya.

Kesempurnaan tetumbuhan di dunia tumbuhan adalah dengan menghasilkan buah tertentu yang tergantung dari pada kondisi-kondisi tertentu yang cocok bagi pertumbuhan dan perkembangan buah tertentu tersebut. Bagaimanapun juga kondisi tersebut telah ditentukan bagi mereka, karena tidak adanya kehendak bebas bagi dunia tetumbuhan. Di alam dunia binatang, kehendak bebas adalah terbatas pada level insting, yang terbatas pada indera jasmaniah.

Pada umat manusia, bagaimana pun juga, lebih dari dunia hewan dan tumbuhan, memiliki dua keutamaan spiritual, yaitu:

  1. Gairah intuisional, yang tidak terbatas hanya pada kebutuhan fisikal saja.
  2. Daya akal, yang dengannya manusia dapat memperluas wawasan dunia pengetahuannya secara tidak terbatas. Dua keutamaan ini akan menambah wilayah cakupan ‘kehendak bebas’-nya ke arah yang tak terbatas.

Dengan cara yang sama dengan kualitas tertentu yang telah membantu dunia tumbuhan untuk mencapai kesempurnaannya, dan sama dengan alat bantu indera jasmaniah pada dunia hewan kepada kesempurnaannya, manusia melengkapi kesempurnaannya dengan pertimbangan akal sehat yang tergabung dengan kepeduliannya. Inilah akal /intelek, yang akan dapat membedakan berbagai tingkatan yang berbeda pada gairah/nafsu dan memilih yang terbaik pada saat yang bertumpuk-tumpuk. Berdasar hal di atas, kita dapat menarik kesimpulan bahwa perilaku manusia secara tetap dimantapkan dengan kualitas kehendak bebas, yang berevolusi dari gairah khusus yang terpilih dan diakui oleh akal sehat.

b. Aturan praktis bagi akal yang membutuhkan landasan perenungan (speculation)

Perilaku manusia yang digunakan dalam kaitannya dengan ‘kehendak bebas’ adalah sebuah alat untuk mencapai tujuan yang diinginkan. Perilaku ini, karena tujuannya adalah bernilai, ini mempengaruhi kesempurnaan manusia. Sebuah perilaku yang akan menyimpangkan dari kesempurnaan bagaimana pun juga, akan berakibat mempunyai nilai negatif.

Ketika akal dapat menilai perilaku manusia dan memastikan nilai harganya, manusia kemudian akan peduli dengan keberadaannya (eksistensinya) dan tingkatan-tingkatan kesempurnaan. Dia dapat mengetahui dimensi yang berbeda-beda dari keberadaan maujudnya dan tujuan penciptaannya. Di atas landasan inilah, ideologi yang benar, yang mengatur system nilai perilaku manusia menjadi saling tercampur dengan pandangan dunia yang benar. Bagaimana pun juga kita tidak dapat menilai perilaku manusia tanpa kita tiba pada prinsip-prinsip tersebut. Pemahaman spekulatif (renungan) yang membentuk pandangan dunia, adalah basis bagi peraturan praktis bagi akal.

c. Hasil yang tercapai

Dengan mengambil persyaratan persiapan ke dalam pertimbangan, kita dapat memahami pentingnya pencarian (inquiring) ke dalam agama dan memiliki sebuah pandangan dunia atau ideologi yang benar.

Manusia dengan wataknya untuk mengejar kesempurnaan bermaksud mencapai kedudukan sempurna melalui kinerja perbuatan dan perilakunya. Bagaimana pun juga untuk mengetahui perilaku jenis apakah yang dapat membantunya mencapai tujuan ini, ia pada awalnya harus peduli kepada tingkatannya yang tak terbatas dari kesempurnaan.

Untuk memahami hal ini, sangatlah perlu bagi dia untuk memahami keberadaanyanya sendiri, mengetahui asal-usulnya, dan tujuan akhirnya, dan kemudian untuk memahami hubungan positif dan negatif di antara berbagai jenis perilaku yang berbeda-beda dan apa akibat-akibatnya. Dia juga harus dapat mengenali bermacam-macam tingkatan kesempurnaan. Tanpa dia menyadari persyaratan-persyaratan tersebut, yang secara mendasar berlandaskan kepada pengetahuan spekulatif (renungan terhadap prinsip-prinsip pandangan dunia), dia tidak akan dapat memahami aturan praktis bagi akal, yaitu ideologi.

Untuk menyimpulkannya, kita dapat mengklaim bahwa pencarian ke dalam sebuah agama yang benar, yang terdiri dari sebuah pandangan dunia dan ideologi yang benar, adalah sangat penting. Tanpa kepercayaan tersebut, manusia tidak akan dapat mencapai kesempurnaannya, karena perilaku yang didasarkan pada pandangan dunia dan ideologi yang salah tidak akan membawanya ke mana-mana.


Mereka yang mempertahankan kesombongannya, nafsunya yang sakit, dan kekafirannya/ ketidak-berimanannya setelah mengetahui kebenaran, pada kenyataannya tidak lebih dari sekedar hewan. Mereka hanya terdorong untuk memuaskan aspek insting hewaniyahnya, sebagaimana digambarkan dalam al-Qur’an:

“Mereka yang tidak beriman dan bersenang-senang dan makan seperti binatang liar makan, maka nerakalah yang pantas baginya.” (QS Muhammad, 47:12 )

Ketika manusia telah menghancurkan potensinya untuk menjadi sempurna, dia akan menghadapi akibat-akibat hukuman yang abadi:

“Biarkanlah mereka makan dan bersenang-senang, dan mereka terperdaya angan-angan, niscaya mereka akan tahu. “ ( QS al Hijr, 15:3 )

Pelajaran ke 4 :
Cara pemecahan masalah mendasar

Pengantar
Ragam Epistemologi yang berbeda
a) Jenis-jenis pandangan dunia yang berbeda-beda
b) Kritisisme dan penelitian
c) Hasil yang dicapai


Pengantar

Ketika manusia memasuki wilayah pemecahan masalah mendasar pandangan dunia dan cara perwujudan pemahaman prinsip-prinsip sebuah agama yang benar, dia pada mulanya akan menemui beberapa pertanyaan berikut: Bagaimanakah masalah-masalah itu dapat dipecahkan? Dan bagaimana seseorang mencari asas-asas epistemologi (asal-usul dan cara memperoleh pengetahuan) dan apa sarana untuk mencapai hal itu?

Penelitian intensif dan profesional atas pemahaman ini dalam filsafat dikenal sebagai ‘epistemologi’, di mana pemahaman-pemahaman yang berbeda-beda dari manusia dibicarakan dan nilai-nilainya diakui.

Untuk mulai memasuki sebuah diskusi tentang semua jenis pemahaman yang beragam mungkin akan jauh menyimpangkan kita dari tujuan buku ini. Namun kami telah meringkaskan subjek yang dibutuhkan, sebagaimana disajikan berikut ini:

Jenis-jenis epistemologi yang beragam

Pemahaman manusia dalam dibagi ke dalam empat bagian:

1. Pemahaman Eksperimental

Pemahaman yang kita dapatkan melalui indera jasmani dikenal sebagai pemahaman/ pengetahuan eksperimental. Akal, bagaimana pun juga memainkan peran aktif dalam mensarikan dan menganlisis presepsi inderawi ini.

Ilmu pengetahuan eksperimental seperti fisika, kimia dan biologi adalah ilmu yang dibangun atas pemahaman eksperimental ini.

2. Pemahaman intelektual

Pemahaman intelektual dibangun melalui abstraksi konsep-konsep. Proses ini sebagian terbesar dibantu oleh akal/intelek, bagaimana pun juga silogisme mungkin kadang-kadang digunakan sebagai sebuah premis. Wilayah pemahaman intelektual adalah logika, filsafat dan matematika.

3. Pemahaman keimanan atau pemahaman religius

Pemahaman ini didasarkan atas informasi yang telah didapat sebelumnya melalui sumber-sumber terpecaya dan telah diterima karena berasal dari orang yang terpercaya dan punya otoritas. Jenis pemahaman ini kadang-kadang dapat menjadi lebih kuat dibanding kepercayaan yang telah berevolusi dari presepsi inderawi dan pengetahuan inderawi.

4. Pemahaman mistikal atau intuitif

Jenis pemahaman ini adalah bertentangan dengan jenis pemahaman/pengetahuan yang telah disebutkan terdahulu. Esensi realitas diketahui tanpa satupun bantuan konsepsi mental, perantaraan atau suatu prosedur apa pun.

Bagaimana pun juga karena pemahaman intuitif atau mistikal didasarkan atas penafsiran atas kesaksian, yang dapat saja berbuat kesalahan, di sinilah kemudian kemungkinannya pemahaman ini juga akan menjadi salah.

a. Ragam pandangan dunia yang berbeda-beda

Dengan mempertimbangan pembagian epistemologi di atas, pandangan dunia pun dapat dibagi sebagai berikut:

1. Pandangan dunia ilmiah:

Didasari oleh hasil dari ilmu pengetahuan eksperimental, manusia membangun sebuah visi universal, yang dikenal sebagai pandangan dunia ilmiah/scientific.

2. Pandangan dunia filosofis

Pandangan dunia ini didasari oleh visi yang didapatkan dari argumentasi intelektual (akal).

3. Pandangan dunia keagamaan:

Manusia dalam pandangan keimanannya dan kepercayaan-nya terhadap para pemimpin agama datang menghampiri perwujudan sebuah visi, yang dapat diklasifikasikan sebagai sebuah pandangan dunia keagamaan.

4. Pandangan dunia irfani:

Pandangan dunia yang didapat melalui pensucian diri, sebagai hasil dari pencerahan (kasyaf) dan penyaksian (syuhuud).

Kita sekarang akan melihat apakah keempat prosedur di atas akan dapat memecahkan masalah mendasar pandangan dunia dan menyiapkan pemecahan masalah yang bijaksana. Kemudian kita akan memutuskan, pandangan dunia yang mana yang paling baik.

b. Kritisisme dan Penelitian

Pemahaman eksperimental adalah terbatas hanya pada alam / dunia materi. Ilmu pengetahuan ilmiah dan eksperimental telah membuktikan atau menafikan masalah-masalah yang terkait dengan prinsip-prinsip pandangan dunia.

Sebagai contoh, seseorang tidak dapat membuktikan membuktikan atau menyangkal eksitensi Tuhan dengan bantuan sebuah eksperimen laboratorium.

Lebih lanjut, dunia pemahaman eksperimental adalah terbatas (tidak dapat) dalam memahami dan menjawab masalah mengenai kenyataan/realitas metafisikal.

Oleh karena itu, menjadi jelaslah bahwa seseorang tidak dapat memahami prinsip-prinsip pandangan dunia, dan memecahkan masalah yang terkait dengannya, atau bahkan untuk menjadi peduli dengan teka-teki yang terkait dengannya bila mendasarkan diri kepada pemahaman ilmiah & pengetahuan eksperimental.

Pemahaman yang memancar keluar dari ketaatan dan tuntutan agama sebagaimana telah disebutkan, kemapanannya tergantung kepada satu sumber yang dapat dipercaya

Pertama-tama keberadaan ‘Yang Asli’ (‘Yang Awal’) harus dibuktikan, yang diikuti dengan pembuktian kenabian, sehingga karenanya pesan-pesan dapat diketahui dan aman. Prinsip eksistensi/keberadaan ‘Yang Asli’ (Yang Awal) dan kenabian tidak dapat dibuktikan melalui pesan (ayat-ayat). Sebagai contoh, sesorang tidak dapat berargumentasi, bahwa karena al-Qur’an telah menyebutkan adanya Tuhan maka Tuhan telah terbukti adanya.

Sesungguhnya, setelah membuktikan eksistensi Tuhan, mengenali Nabi Utusan Tuhan, dan kebenaran Al Qur’an, seseorang dapat menerima bantuan keimanan dan amal-amal yang didasarkan saluran terpercaya (Nabi Allah) dan sumber terpercaya (Tuhan Allah).

Oleh karena itu, masalah-masalah tersebut tidak dapat memanfaatkan ketaatan untuk menjawab pertanyaan mendasar tentang prinsip-prinsip (eksistensi/keberadaan Tuhan, kenabian, dll.) yang terkait dengan pandangan dunia.

Bagaimanapun juga, sarana ma’rifat (irfan) dan pencerahan membutuhkan serangkaian diskusi :

  • Sebuah pandangan dunia adalah pemahaman yang dicapai melalui kebaikan konsepsi mental; namun tidak ada tempat bagi konsepsi mental dalam dunia persaksian.
  • Sebuah penafsiran kesaksian dan ekspresinya dalam kata-kata membutuhkan pikiran intelektual dan keterampilan yang memiliki latar belakang penelitian ekstensif dalam filsafat. Mereka yang lemah akalnya dan tidak punya sarana yang terampil untuk membawa/menyampaikan makna-makna secara akurat, dapat menggunakan konsep dan kata-kata yang sama namun yang mengarahkan ke penyimpangan umum dan ketidakwajaran.
  • Seringkali, realitas, yang telah disaksikan, berada di bawah pengaruh khayalan dan penjelasan yang diberikan pikiran, bahkan untuk kesaksian seseorang yang tidak akurat.
  • Mendapatkan realitas, yang dikenal sebagai pandangan dunia (sebagaimana ditafsirkan oleh akal) adalah melampaui perjalanan spiritual (ruhaniah). Penerimaan jalan ruhaniyah (syair wa suluk), yang dengan sendirinya berasal dari pemahaman praktis, membutuhkan landasan perenungan/pemikiran spekulatif dan masalah-masalah pandangan dunia. Untuk mengawali perjalanan ruhaniah, seseorang harus memecahkan masalah-masalah mendasar pandangan dunia. Pemenuhan masalah-masalah ini akan melibatkan pemahaman Gnostic (Irfani/ma’rifat). Sesungguhnya, mistisisme yang benar (‘irfan), hanya dapat terwujud pada diri seseorang yang berada dalam jalan pengabdian ibadah dan yang berjuang dengan sungguh-sungguh untuk kebenaran. Proses ini adalah tunduk patuh kepada pemahaman terdahulu terhadap Tuhan dan jalan pengabdian (ibadah) dan penyerahan diri (Islam).

c. Kesimpulan

Satu-satunya jalan untuk memecahkan masalah mendasar pandangan dunia adalah secara intelektual (aqly), yaitu melalui penggunaan akal sehat. Untuk alasan inilah pandangan dunia yang benar dapat dikenal sebagai pandangan dunia filosofis.

Bagaimanapun juga mengetahui cara memecahkan masalah-masalah melalui pandangan dunia filosofis tidaklah cukup, namun untuk mencapai sebuah pandangan dunia yang tepat, juga tidak perlu memecahkan semua masalah filsafat. Tapi cukup memecahkan beberapa masalah filsafat yang sederhana yang sebenarnya swabukti (terbukti dengan sendirinya) untuk membuktikan eksistensi Tuhan (masalah mendasar pandangan dunia).

Tidak perlu dilihat secara berlebihan, bahwa untuk menjadi terspesialisasi dalam masalah-masalah keagamaan dengan maksud untuk memiliki kemampuan menjawab pertanyaan-pertanyaan dan keraguan-keraguan, membutuhkan kajian filsafat yang mendalam. Selanjutnya, pemikiran filsafat harus diwujudkan karena jenis lain dari epistemologi adalah terbatas bila dibandingkan dengan pemahaman intelektual (akal), namun ini tidak berarti bahwa hal-hal itu tidak revelan, informasi selebihnya darinya dapat juga dimanfaatkan dalam memecahkan masalah-masalah.

Mayoritas argumentasi intelektual menggunakan sebuah kombinasi pengetahuan intuitif, pemahaman eksperimental dan persepsi inderawi sebagai premis-premis. Oleh karena itu setelah menyimpulkan sebuah pandangan dunia dan ideologi yang benar seseorang dapat sampai pada visi mistikal (mukasyafah) melalui perjalanan ruhaniyah tanpa satupun perantara konsepsi mental. Bagaimana pun juga intuisi-intuisi mistikal tersebut dapat dibuktikan dengan argumentasi intelektual.


Pelajaran ke-Lima
Mengenal Tuhan

· Pendahuluan
· Pengenalan melalui Ilmu hudhuri (knowledge by presence) dan Ilmu capaian (knowledge by acquisition).
· Pengenalan melalui watak hakiki

Pendahuluan

Dasar-dasar agama adalah kepercayaan/keimanan terhadap Tuhan Sang Maha Pencipta Alam Semesta. Point ini membentuk bagian-bagian yang dapat dibagi lagi, yang memisahkan pandangan dunia ketuhanan dari padangan dunia materialistik. Faktor utama yang muncul dalam pencarian realitas adalah apakah Tuhan itu ada atau tidak ada (eksis atau tidak eksis). Kita harus sampai pada kesimpulan positif atau negatif melalui penggunaan akal. Jika kesimpulannya adalah positif, kemudian kita meneruskan untuk meninjau masalah kedua (seperti: keesaan, keadilan, sifat–sifat Tuhan lainnya.) Jika, dengan kata lain hasilnya membuktikan menjadi negatif, kemudian kita menerima pandangan dunia materialistik dan tidak ada lagi kebutuhan untuk melakukan penyelidikan ke dalam agama.

Pengetahuan melalui ‘ilmu hudhuri’ (knowledge by presence) dan ilmu capaian (knowledge by acquisition)

Ada dua cara untuk mengetahui Tuhan; cara pertama adalah melalui ilmu pengetahuan capaian (acquired knowledge/ knowledge by acquisition) dan cara yang lain adalah melaui ilmu hudhuri (Ilmu yang dihadirkan / knowledge by presence).

Makna dari Ilmu Hudhuri adalah berarti bahwa seseorang mengetahui Tuhan melalui sejenis persaksian bathiniah, tanpa satupun perantara atau konsepsi mental. Hal ini adala swabukti (terbukti dengan sendirinya) bahwa jika seseorang memiliki kesadaran penyaksian Tuhan –cara yang telah diakui oleh para Irfan yang agung— kemudian dia tidak membutuhkan satupun pembuktian intelektual ataupun penalaran. Bagaimana pun juga untuk rata-rata orang, pengetahuan dan visi jenis ini hanya dimungkinkan melalui pembinaan diri dan perjalanan ruhaniyah. Walaupun sebuah versi yang lemah darinya hadir dalam rata-rata orang, ini tidak tercampur dengan kepedulian dan tidak dianggap cukup untuk mencapai pandangan dunia.

Makna pengetahuan capaian adalah bahwa seseorang melalui usaha pencapaian dengan bantuan konsep-konsep universal –seperti Sang Maha Pencipta, Sang Maha Mengetahui, Maha Kuasa, dll.— menyatakan secara intelektual (aqly) Wujud (eksistensi) Tuhan.

Bagaimana pun juga pemahaman ini terbatas dan tidak memadai karena hal ini melekat pada kapasitas intelektual dari orang tersebut dan kemudian dia terkait dengan tambahan ilmu pengetahuan capaian bagi landasan ini untuk memantapkan sebuah sistem kepercayaan yang harmonis (pandangan dunia). Ilmu pengetahuan capaian muncul dari pembuktian intelektual (akal) dan pemikiran filosofis. Sekali capaian dapat dimasuki oleh seseorang, dunia pemahaman dan mewujudkan pengetahuan Hudhuri (yang dihadirkan) akan terbuka.

Pengetahuan melalui watak fitrah (intrinsic nature)

Dalam kebanyakan wacana para wali, ‘urafa dan filosof, kita menemukan bahwa mengenal Tuhan adalah watak insting alami manusia, dan sesuatu yang inherent dalam dirinya melalui watak intrinsik (fitrah-nya). Untuk mengerti definisi ini seseorang harus menentukan hakikat makna watak fitrah (intrinsic nature).

Dalam bahasa Arab, kata ‘fitrah’ digunakan untuk menyatakan ‘sejenis Penciptaan’ . Hal tersebut, yang terkait dengan watak hakiki, disebut ‘fitri’ , dan melalui hal itu makhluknya tergantung pada sesuatu yang telah Wujud (eksistent) Kita menganggap hal tersebut, yang fitri, mempunyai gambaran tertentu :

1. Makhluk-makhluk yang berbeda-beda semuanya mempunyai watak fitrah yang sama di dalam spesies mereka, walaupun ada banyak variasi mengenai kekuatan dan kelemahan. Hal yang terkait dengan watak fitrah dalam wacana sejarah telah ditentukan sebagai permanen dan abadi.

“Maka hadapkalah wajahmu pada agama yang lurus/hanif. Fitrah Allah, yang dengannya umat manusia telah diciptakan. Tidak ada perubahan dalam fitrah penciptaan oleh Allah.”
(QS Rumm, 30:30)

2. Watak fitrah adalah mencukupkan dirinya sendiri dari pendidikan dan pelatihan, bagaimana pun juga fitrah ini dapat diintensifkan dan dibimbing melalui bantuan disiplin. Watak fitrah ini dapat dibagi ke dalam dua bagian:

a. Pengetahuan yang terkait dengan watak fitrah yang dikaruniakan kepada manusia dan tidak didapat melalui belajar.
b. Kecenderungan dan gerak hati yang terkait dengan watak fitrah dan yang merupakan elemen penting dalam penciptaan setiap individu.

Di atas landasan ini, jika kepedulian terhadap Tuhan muncul dari dalam diri setiap umat manusia dan bukan merupakan hal yang dibutuhkan manusia untuk didapat melalui penelitian, lalu hal ini dapat disebut “mengenal Tuhan melalui watak ‘fitrah’. Jika semua manusia cenderung beribadah kepada Tuhan, lalu itu dapat dikenal sebagai ‘ibadah melalui watak fitrah’

Di dalam pelajaran kedua kami telah menyebutkan bahwa banyak ahli di bidang antropologi dan psikologi telah memiliki kecenderungan ke arah agama sebagai psikologis dan telah melabelinya sebagai ‘rasa keberagamaan’ atau ‘sentimen beragama’.

Kita mesti menekankan bahwa ‘mengenal Tuhan’ adalah berdasarkan watak fitrah manusiawi. Bagaimana pun juga watak fitrah pengetahuan dan pengabdian kepada Tuhan adalah tidak dengan kepedulian penuh dalam sebuah cara sehingga hal itu akan dapat mencukupkan orang-orang awam dari penalaran intelektual.

Kita tidak boleh lupa bahwa elemen ilmu hudhuri ada dalam setiap individu dalam sebuah derajat yang paling rendah dan disempurnakan melalui penalaran intelektual. Sebagai kesimpulan, mengenal Tuhan adalah watak fitrah, berarti bahwa hati manusia peduli terhadap Tuhan, dan jiwanya memiliki potensi mengenal Tuhan dengan kepedulian penuh.

Pelajaran ke-Enam
Cara sederhana mengenal Tuhan

Cara-cara mengenal Tuhan
a) Kekhususan cara-cara sederhana
b) Tanda-tanda yang mudah diketahui


Cara-cara mengenal Tuhan

Ada beberapa medium yang melaluinya manusia dapat mengenal Tuhan, banyak di antaranya yang telah disebutkan dalam beragam buku-buku filsafat, theologi, dan di dalam wacana para wali (orang-orang suci). Medium tersebut atau cara-cara yang telah menggunakan bentuk-bentuk tertentu penalaran dan pembuktian: sebagai contoh beberapa orang telah menggunakan indera jasmaniah dan ilmu pengetahuan eksperimental, dengan kata lain beberapa orang telah menerapkan argumentasi intelektual sebagai premis untuk mengetahui Tuhan. Beberapa mazhab berusaha untuk membuktikan adanya Tuhan secara langsung dan mazhab tertentu hanya membuktikan keberadaan/eksistensi-Nya, yang tidak tergantung kepada satupun eksitent (necessary existent / wajibul wujud). Untuk memahami kompleksitas-Nya (sifat-sifatnya), pembinaan argumen lainnya dibutuhkan.

Pembuktian dan penalaran pengetahuan tentang Tuhan dapat dibandingkan kepada keanekaragaman cara seseorang menyeberangi sebuah sungai: beberapa orang lebih suka berenang, beberapa orang lainnya lebih suka menggunakan jembatan kayu yang melintang di atas sungai, sehingga seorang pejalan yang berat dapat melintasi dengan mudah dan mencapai tujuannya. Jembatan lain mungkin dibangun dari batu-batu, sehingga menjadi lebih kuat dan tahan lama, cara-cara tersebut lalu menjadi lebih panjang. Akhirnya, beberapa jembatan seperti jembatan besi yang meliuk-liuk, yang terdiri dari jalur kereta api, menyiapkan cara perjalanan yang lebih kompleks.

Seorang dengan pikiran yang sederhana dapat mengenali Tuhan melalui cara yang sangat sederhana dan memenuhi tanggung jawabnya dalam beribadah. Jika seseorang menemui banyak kritisisme, yang menyebabkan keraguannya, lalu dia lebih suka jembatan batu. Orang yang terlibat dengan keraguan yang ekstrim dan pertanyaan yang harus memilih jalan yang kompleks; ini adalah penting baginya, bahkan walau melalui jalannya mejadi semakin panjang.

Kita kini bermaksud membuat garis besar tiga tingkatan yang berbeda, yang denganya manusia dapat mengenal Tuhan. Pertama dengan membatasi pada cara sederhana, lalu cara pertengahan, dan akhirnya cara yang lebih kompleks, jalan/cara-cara ini menghasilkan beberapa masalah mendasar dalam filsafat dan bagi pemikirannya, yang penuh dengan keraguan dan yang telah menjadi menyimpang dari kenyataan dan tujuan.

a. Kekhususan cara sederhana

Cara sederhana dalam mengetahui/mengenal Tuhan diberikan dengan berbagai keuntungan dan keistimewaan, yang paling penting di anataranya dikemukankan sebagai berikut ini:

  1. Cara permulaaan adalah cara yang paling sederhana dari semuanya dan tidak memerlukan premis yang rumit atau canggih. Ini mudah dipahami oleh semua tingkatan pemikiran.
  2. Cara/jalan ini langsung menerima Tuhan sebagai Sang Maha Pencipta yang Maha Bijaksana. Dalam jalan ini tidak seperti filsafat atau theologi (kalam) di mana pembuktian eksistensi Tuhan adalah yang pertama dilengkapi dan kemudian diikuti dengan pembuktian kebenaran sifat-sifat-Nya melalui penalaran akal.
  3. Cara ini didasarkan dan penekanan pada watak fitrah manusia. Melalui perenungan dan pemikiran manusia akan menyaksikan keindahan Tuhan dalam penciptaan sebagaimana dalam perwujudannya yang lain.
  4. Para wali (orang suci) membimbing umat untuk memanfaatkan cara ini, yang berdasarkan watak fitrah manusia. Bagaimana pun juga ketika berdiskusi atau berdebat dengan kaum atheis, filosof materialis atau orang-orang yang sok cerdas, para imam akan memilih metode yang beragam untuk berdebat

b. Tanda-tanda yang mudah dikenal

Dengan merenungkan tanda-tanda (ayat-ayat) di sekitar kita, manusia akan sampai kepada sebuah pemahaman terhadap Penciptanya. Dalam peristilahan al-Qur’an perenungan tersebut disebut sebagai ‘merenungkan atau memikirkan tanda-tanda kebesaran Tuhan Allah’. Karena itu segala sesuatu yang ada di langit dan di bumi dan apa-apa yang ada di dalam diri manusia sendiri mencerminkan Tuhan dan menjadi saluran qalbu merasakan kehadiran bimbingan Tuhan di alam semesta.

Buku yang Anda pegang di tangan saat ini adalah sebuah tanda dari penulisnya. Bukankah benar bahwa dengan membacanya, Anda menjadi peduli bahwa penulisnya adalah cerdas dan mempunyai sebuah tujuan? Pernahkah Anda berpikir bahwa karya tulis ini adalah hasil akibat dari serangkaian reaksi tanpa tujuan? Bukan itu sebuah pikiran yang absurd jika mengatakan bahwa sebuah ensiklopedia yang terdiri dari ratusan jilid hadir keberadaannya sebagai sebuah efek ledakan yang terjadi di tambang logam, pecahannya yang mengambil bentuk huruf-huruf dan melalui perjumpaan yang terjadi secara kebetulan dengan sepotong kertas menjadikan tulisan muncul dan kemudian dan lalu kertas-kertas itu juga secara kebetulan menjadi teratur dan menjadi berjilid-jilid?

Menerima peristiwa secara buta sebagai sebuah alat untuk menjelasakan alam semesta sebagai sebuah fenomena kebetulan saja, dengan segala rahasia tersembunyi dan yang terbuka dan kebijaksanaan di balik itu, adalah ribuan kali lebih absurd dari pada pemikiran yang sudah disebutkan tadi! Setiap tatanan yang sudah ditentukan adalah sebuah tanda-tanda dari sebuah penentu yang mengatur dan menentukan. Jenis keteraturan tatanan dapat dirasakan di semua jagat alam semesta.

Keteraturan tatanan di alam semesta ini telah ditentukan oleh Sang Maha Pencipta Yang Maha Bijaksana, yang secara terus-menerus mengelola (me-manage) alam semesta ini.

Semak-semak tanaman bungan mawar akarnya tertanam dalam lumpur dan tanah di dalam sebuah kebun yang indah, yang mempunyai warna-warna tertentu dan wewangian yang beraneka ragam, sebuah pohon apel berasal dari sebuah biji dan setiap tahun menghasilkan banyak buah apel yang sangat enak rasanya, bagus warnanya dan harum baunya.

Kemudian nyanyian burung bul-bul, anak ayam yang menetas dari sebuah telur, dengan paruhnya yang mematuk-matuk tanah, dan anak sapi yang baru lahir yang menyusui induknya, pada saat yang sama dadanya siap dengan suplai susu untuk bayi manusia, dll. Semua ini adalah tanda-tanda kekuasaan-Nya.


Bukankah menakjubkan melihat bahwa lebah madu, sapi dan kambing menyediakan bagi manusia madu dan susu khusus hanya untuknya dalam jumlah yang tak terbatas? Manusia yang tak mau berterima kasih (bersyukur) bagaimana pun juga tidak mengetahui karunia-karunia yang mudah dikenali ini, dan menghadapi semua ini dengan konfrontasi dan pengingkaran.

Di dalam tubuhnya sendiri manusia dapat melihat akibat yang jelas dari kebijaksanaan pengawasan Tuhan; bentuk badan dengan pembagian fungsinya yang seimbang, struktur luaran yang vital dengan organ dalam harmonis yang tersusun dari jutaan sel, yang semuanya berasal dari sebuah sel induk, masing-masing sel mengandung porsi tertentu materi khusus untuk suatu fungsi yang tepat, seperti ketika kita bernafas: oksigen melewati paru-paru, lalu diangkut oleh sel darah merah ke sel-sel, dan hati yang memproduksi gula yang dibutuhkan tubuh manusia, dan penggantian sel-sel rusak dan mati dengan sel-sel yang baru, dan pertahanan tubuh manusia oleh sel darah putih melawan virus-virus dan mikroba-mikroba, dan berbagai jenis hormon –yang diproduksi oleh berbagai kelenjar- mengorganisasikan tugas-tugas psysiologis dari tubuh manusia, semua yang disebut di atas adalah tanda-tanda kekuasaan Tuhan Allah Yang Maha Kuasa.

Sistem physiologis ini begitu misterius, dan bahkan melalui puluhan abad yang telah lewat, manusia masih harus terus melakukan penelitian untuk menemukan fungsi-fungsinya. Jika seseorang melakukan penelitian terhadap detil-detil yang paling kecil dari sel hidup, dia tidak akan ragu lagi bertanya siapakah yang telah mengatur dan menciptakannya di balik itu semua. Ini adalah kebijaksanaan Tuhan Maha Pencipta yang Maha Sempurna dan Maha Pengatur, yang mengurus semua urusan:

“Sesungguhnya Allah menumbuhkan butir tumbuh-tumbuhan dan biji buah-buahan. Dia mengeluarkan yang hidup dari yang mati dan mengeluarkan yang mati dari yang hidup. (Yang memiliki sifat-sifat) demikian ialah Allah, maka mengapa kamu masih berpaling” (QS Al An’aam, 6: 95).

Jelas nyata, karena ilmu pengetahuan mengembang dan menumbuhkan hasil-hasil dalam makin banyak penemuan hukum-hukum alam dan hubungan-hubungan antar hukum-hukum alam tersebut, hal itu akan menghasilkan pembukaan rahasia kebijaksanaan di balik penciptaan. Bagaimana pun juga dengan memikirkan dan merenungkan tanda-tanda kekuasaan Tuhan tersebut, yang sederhana dan dapat dilihat dengan jelas adalah cukup bagi hati yang ikhlas dan tidak teracuni.


Pelajaran ke-Tujuh
Pembuktian bagi Eksistensi Wajib (Yang diperlukan Ada-nya)

Pendahuluan
Teks-teks argumentasi (pembuktian)
Kemungkinan dan Kewajiban(Yang diperlukan)
a) Sebab dan akibat
b)Ketidakmungkinan rentetan sebab-sebab yang tak berujung.
c) Peneguhan argumentasi

Pendahuluan

Pada pelajaran terdahulu, kita telah mengetahui bahwa para filosof dan para ulama teologi (mutakalimun) telah memantapkan beberapa argumentasi pembuktian adanya Tuhan.

Pada pelajaran ini kita akan mengambil salah satu dari sekian banyak argumentasi tersebut, karena faktanya sangat elementer dan sederhana dan tidak membutuhkan pengantar untuk memantapkan sebuah eksistensi sebagai wajib (diperlukan adanya). Bagaimana pun juga kebenaran argumentasi ini hanya untuk membuktikan eksistensi wajib (wajib al-wujud), seperti sebuah eksistensi yang tidak membutuhkan, memerlukan atau tergantung kepada eksistensi lain untuk keberadaannya, dan untuk membuktikan sifat-sifat positifnya (Maha Mengetahui/’Ilm, Maha Kuasa, tidak terikat ruang dan waktu) membutuhkan tambahan argumentasi.

Teks-teks pembuktian

Eksistensi melalui presepsi akal apakah itu adalah eksistensi wajib ataukah eksistensi yang mungkin. Secara akal, tidak ada eksistensi yang terletak di luar dua asumsi ini dan setiap eksistensi tidak dapat diketahui sebagai sebuah ‘eksistensi yang mungkin’ karena suatu ‘eksistensi yang mungkin’ selalu membutuhkan sebuah sebab (ill’ah). Jika semua sebab-sebab adalah eksistensi yang mungkin, masing-masing mereka pada gilirannya membutuhkan satu sebab, maka tidak ada eksistensi yang akan pernah ada, dengan kata lain sebuah rangkaian serial yang tak terbatas (tasalsul) dari sebab-sebab adalah tidak mungkin (muhal). Oleh karena sebuah rangkaian yang tak terbatas dari sebab-sebab (yang di belakang) memaksa untuk mengakhirinya dalam sebuah eksistensi (maw’jud), yang tidak memerlukan suatu sebab (ma’lul) berupa eksitensi lain, inilah eksistensi wajib.

Argumentasi inilah yang merupakan argumentasi yang paling sederhana dalam filsafat untuk membuktikan eksistensi (keberadaan) Tuhan. Argumen ini telah dibangun dengan beberapa silogisme intelektual dan tidak memerlukan satupun bentuk presepsi inderawi atau eksperimentasi ilmiah sebagai sebuah premis.

Bagaimana pun juga hal ini telah menggunakan istilah-istilah dan konsep-konsep filsafat, karenanya ini membutuhkan sebuah penjelasan tentang premis-premis dan istilah-istilah (terminologi) tersebut dalam argumentasi.

Hal yang Mungkin dan Wajib

Semua proposisi (pernyataan) mempunyai dua konsep mendasar (subjek dan predikat) tanpa memperhatikan apakah hal-hal itu sederhana ataukan kompleks, sebagai contoh adalah beberapa aksioma, ‘Matahari bersinar’ yang mengemukakan bersinarnya matahari, ‘Matahari’ adalah subjek dan ‘bersinar’ adalah predikat.

Tegaknya sebuah predikat bagi subjek memiliki tidak lebih dari tiga kedudukan: apakah itu tidak mungkin, seperti: ‘tiga adalah lebih besar dari empat’, ataukah itu wajib, seperti ‘dua adalah setengah dari empat’, ataukah hal itu mungkin dan juga wajib, seperti contoh: ‘ matahari ada di kepala kita’. Dalam terminologi logika, proposisi pertama memiliki kedudukan ‘tidak mungkin’ (imtina’), proposisi yang kedua adalah sifat yang diberikan dari ‘yang wajib’ (wujub), dan pernyataan yang ketiga adalah dianggap sebagai mungkin (imkan).

Bagaimana pun juga dalam filsafat hanya eksitensi yang telah didiskusikan dan hal-hal tersebut, yang menjadi tidak mampu ada atau terjadi dan tidak mungkin (mumtani’) tidak pernah akan memiliki sebuah eksistensi (al-wujud al-kharij). Untuk alasan inilah filsafat memperhatikan eksistensi dari sebuah persepsi akal sebagai keberadaan yang merupakan eksistensi yang wajib atau eksistensi yang mungkin.

Eksitensi yang wajib dikenal sebagai ‘existent’, yang ada dengan sendirinya dan tidak tergantung kepada eksistensi yang lain. Sebenarnya existent tersebut tidak memiliki awal dan akhir, karena yang bukan eksistensi atau apa pun dalam sebagian waktu adalah indikasi bahwa keberadaannya adalah bukan berasal dari diri sendiri, karena ‘non-eksistensi’ dari sesuatu dalam satu waktu partikular adalah sebuah indikasi bahwa eksistensinya adalah tidak berasal dari dirinya sendiri. Untuk menjadi eksistensi dia membutuhkan eksistensi lain, yang berupa sebab atau kondisi bagi perwujudannya. Ketidak hadiran kondisi tersebut atau sebab-sebab akan menjadi alasan ketiadaan.

Eksistensi yang mungkin (mum’kin al-wujud) dikenal sebagai sebuah eksistent yang tidak akan eksis dengan sendirinya dan tergantung kepada eksistensi lain untuk terwujudnya.

Pembagian ini, yang mengambil tempat melalui presepsi akal, secara esensial mengabaikan eksistensi ketidakmungkinan (mumtani’ al-wujud), namun ini tidak memiliki satupun indikasi apakah eksistent itu adalah eksistensi yang mungkin ataukah eksistensi yang wajib.

Dengan kata lain keaslian persepsi dapat dikonseptualisasikan dalam tiga bentuk esensial:
1. Setiap eksistent adalah eksistent wajib
2. Setiap eksistent adalah eksistent yang mungkin
3. Beberapa eksistent adalam eksistent wajib dan beberapa adalah eksistent yang mungkin,

Berdasarkan asumsi yang pertama dan ketiga, keberadaan satu eksistensi wajib adalah mantap, oleh karena itu asumsi yang harus ditinjau ulang adalah apakah semua eksistensi (keberadaan) adalah eksistensi yang mungkin atau tidak?

Bagaimana pun juga dengan penyangkalan asumsi ini (bahwa semua eksistents adalah eksistent yang mungkin), keberadaan eksistensi wajib adalah jelas pasti dan terbukti dengan meyakinkan.

Kemantapan kesatuan (unity) dan sifat-sifat lain, harus terbukti dengan dengan argumen lain. Oleh karena itu untuk menyangkal asumsi kedua, argumen tambahan mesti digunakan, yaitu: “apakah mungkin bahwa semua eksistensi adalah menjadi ‘eksistensi yang mungkin’? Karena argumentasi ini tidak terbukti dengan sendirinya, ini dapat diterangkan sebagai berikut: Setiap eksistensi yang mungkin membutuhkan sebuah sebab dan tidaklah mungkin memiliki rangkaian sebab yang tak berakhir (tak ada ujungnya) Maka rangkaian sebab yang tak ada akhirnya itu terpaksa berakhir pada sebuah eksistensi yang tak lagi membutuhkan sebuah sebab apapun, yaitu eksistensi wajib (yang diperlukan). Argumentasi ini telah memperkenalkan konsep filsafat yang lain, yang membutuhkan suatu penjelasan ringkas baginya dan hal-hal yang terkait dengannya.

Sebab dan akibat

Jika sebuah eksistensi membutuhkan eksistensi lain dan tergantung kepada eksistensi lain untuk keberadaannya, kemudian dalam terminologi filsafat, eksistensi yang disebabkan dikenal sebagi ‘akibat’ dan eksistensi lainnya dikenal sebagai ‘sebab’. Bagaimana pun juga adalah mungkin bahwa sebuah sebab dapat juga menjadi sebuah akibat, dan menjadi sebuah eksistensi yang tergantung, tidak secara mutlak bebas dari kebutuhan. Jika sebuah sebab secara mutlak bebas dari kebutuhan dan tidak tergantung kepada yang lain, lalu itu akan menjadi ‘Sebab yang Mutlak’

Sekarang kita menjadi familiar dengan definisi istilah ‘sebab’ dan ‘akibat’. Kita sekarang akan membuktikan sebuah penjelasan dan premis yang telah disebutkan di muka (“setiap eksistensi yang mungkin membutuhkan sebuah sebab”).

Eksistensi yang mungkin, tidaklah eksis dengan sendirinya dan tidak punya alternatif selain tergantung kepada eksistensi lainnya. Maka setiap predikat yang dikenal untuk subjek adalah muncul baik dengan sendirinya (bil-that) atau dengan perantaraan yang lain selain dirinya (bilghayr). Sebagai contoh: setiap hal yang bersinar di dalamnya dan dengan sendirinya atau membutuhkan sesuatu yang lain untuk penyinarannya, atau setiap tubuh yang berminyak dengan sendirinya atau membutuhkan minyak untuk menjadi berminyak. Adalah tidak mungkin bagi sesuatu dalam dirinya sendiri tidak tersinari atau terminyaki dan tidak menerima sinar atau minyak dari apa pun, dan pada saat sama menjadi berminyak dan bersinar.

Oleh karena itu kemunculan/tegaknya sebuah eksistensi bagi sebuah subjek apakah melalui esensinya atau dengan perantaraan selain dirinya, dan ketika itu tidak melalui esensinya, lalu itu harus dengan perantaraan selain dari dirinya. Maka setiap eksistensi yang mungkin, yang terwujud tidak melalui esensinya, menjadi terwujud dengan perantaraan yang selain dirinya, secara tersirat itu adalah sebuah akibat. Hal ini menyajikan prinsip fundamental bagi akal, bahwa setiap ‘eksistensi yang mungkin’ membutuhkan sebuah sebab.

Bagaimana pun juga, beberapa orang telah memahami bahwa prinsip penyebaban berarti bahwa semua eksistensi membutuhkan sebuah sebab, maka Tuhan membutuhkan sebuah sebab Primer. Mereka telah terlalu berlebihan dalam melihat fakta bahwa subjek dari prinsip penyebaban adalah eksistensi dalam pengertian ‘eksistensi yang mungkin’ dan akibatnya, tapi tidak berlaku bagi ‘Eksistensi Mutlak’ (Tuhan). Tidak semua eksistensi membutuhkan sebuah sebab, hanya eksistensi-eksistensi yang membutuhkan dan tergantung sajalah yang membutuhkan suatu sebab.

b. Ketidakmungkinan rangkaian penyebab tanpa akhir

Premis terakhir yang digunakan dalam argumentasi ini adalah bahwa rangkaian sebab harus berakhir pada sebuah eksistensi, yang bukan merupakan sebuah akibat. Dalam istilah teknis sebuah rangkaian tanpa akhir dari sebab-sebab adalah tidak mungkin. Hal ini kemudian memantapkan bahwa eksistensi yang wajib adalah penyebab awal, yang hidup dengan sendirinya dan tidak tergantung kepada eksistensi lain.

Filsafat telah mendatangkan banyak argumentasi untuk menyanggah rangkaian tak terbatas (tasalsul); meskipun dengan kurangnya pemikiran, rangkaian tak terbatas akan seolah-olah terlihat terbukti dengan sendirinya. Oleh karena itulah dikatakan, mengingat eksistensi dari sebuah akibat membutuhkan sebuah sebab dan kondisi atas sebab itu. Lagi pula jika keadaan tersebabkan (ma’luliyyah) dan kondisi ini adalah universal, lalu tidak ada eksistensi yang akan terwujud di mana pun juga. Hal ini adalah karena asumsi beberapa eksistensi yang tergantung tanpa keberadaan dari sebuah eksistensi adalah bertentangan dengan akal.

Marilah kita umpamakan bahwa ada sekelompok pelari yang menunggu untuk mulai balap lari, mereka semua telah memutuskan bahwa mereka tidak akan mulai berlari sampai yang lainnya mulai berlari. Jika keputusan ini berlaku bagi semua di antara mereka, lalu tak ada seorang pun yang akan mulai berlari.

Dalam cara sama jika keberadaan setiap eksistensi adalah tergantung dari kondisi (syarat) atas perwujudan (keberadaan) eksistensi lain, maka tidak akan pernah ada satu pun eksistensi yang mewujud. Perwujudan sebuah eksistensi eksternal menunjukkan bahwa ada sebuah eksistensi, yang tidak membutuhkan apapun dan tidak tergantung pada syarat apa pun.

c. Penegasan kebenaran argumentasi

Pada peristiwa ini, dengan memahami premis-premis tersebut. Tidak ingin kembali menegaskan kebenaran argumentasi kita:

Semua hal yang dapat dipertimbangkan sebagai sebuah eksistensi, memiliki tidak lebih dari dua keadaan:

  1. Eksistensi yang dibutuhkan adanya (wajib) dan berada (eksis) dengan esensinya sendiri. Dalam bahasa teknis ini disebut dengan ‘eksistensi yang wajib’ (necessary existent).
  2. Eksistensi yang keberadaannya tidak wajib dan perwujudannya tergantung kepada eksistensi lain. Dalam bahasa teknis hal ini dikenal dengan istilah ‘eksistensi yang mungkin’ (the possible existent).
    Adalah terbukti dengan sendirinya bahwa jika perwujudan (realisasi) dari sesuatu hal adalah tidak mungkin, lalu itu tidak pernah akan menjadi wujud; maka setiap eksistensi adalah sebuah eksistensi yang mungkin atau sebuah ‘eksistensi yang wajib’ adanya.
    Dengan memfokuskan pada konsep ‘eksistensi yang mungkin’, menjadi jelaslah bahwa setiap rujukan konsep ini adalah sebuah akibat dan membutuhkan sebuah sebab.
    Lebih lanjut jika sebuah eksitensi tidak eksis (ada) karena esensinya sendiri kemudian menjadi perlu bahwa itu menjadi ada melalui eksistensi lain, karena setiap sifat yang tidak wujud dengan esensinya sendiri, musti eksis dengan perantaraan sebab eksistensi yang selain dirinya.
    Prinsip sebab-akibat menegaskan bahwa setiap eksistensi tergantung dan mungkin membutuhkan sebuah sebab. Namun tidak semua eksistensi membutuhkan sebuah sebab; sebaliknya seseorang mungkin akan menyimpulkan bahwa kemudian mesti ada sebuah sebab bagi Tuhan. Dari sisi lain hal itu mesti dilihat bahwa jika semua eksistensi adalah eksistensi yang mungkin, maka tidak akan pernah ada satupun eksistensi yang mewujud. Hal ini adalah seperti mengasumsikan bahwa sekelempok orang telah mensyaratkan aksinya kepada yang lainnya, yang berarti tidak ada aktifitas. Bagaimana pun juga, aktifitas eksternal dari eksistensi memunculkan keberadaan sebuah eksistensi yang wajib.

Pelajaran ke Delapan
Sifat-Sifat Tuhan

Pendahuluan
Sifat Abadi Tuhan
a) Sifat-sifat negative
b) Penyebab yang memberikan eksistensi
d) Kekhususan penyebab yang memberikan eksistensi


Pendahuluan

Dalam pelajaran terdahulu kita telah membicarakan argumentasi pembuktian adanya eksistensi yang wajib (Tuhan). Dengan menurunkan argumentasi lain kita sekarang akan membuktikan sifat negatif dan sifat positif dari eksistensi ini. Hal ini perlu sehingga kita kita mengenali Tuhan Sang Pencipta berbeda dari makhluk/ciptaan-Nya. Tidaklah cukup untuk hanya mengenali Dia sebagai ‘eksistensi wajib’, karena beberapa orang menganggap bahwa materi dan energi adalah rujukan –sebagai sebuah konsep-(misdaq) bagi eksistensi wajib ini.

Wacana berikut adalah dari dua sudut pandang:

  1. Dengan memantapkan sifat-sifat negatif maka eksistensi wajib dimuliakan dan disucikan dari watak anthropomorphic dan tidak dibandingkan dengan makhluk-Nya
  2. Dengan memantapkan sifat-sifat positif maka Tuhan Sang Pencipta dapat diketahui sebagai wujud yang pantas disembah dan diibadahi, dan untuk meletakkan landasan untuk membuktikan prinsip lain seperti kenabian, hari kebangkitan dan cabang-cabangnya.

Dari argumentasi di atas kita telah menyadari bahwa eksistensi wajib tidak membutuhkan satupun sebab dan bahwa Dia adalah sebab bagi ‘eksistensi yang mungkin’. Kemudian kita telah siap memantapkan dua sifat bagi eksistensi wajib, yaitu:
1. Tidak tergantung kepada satupun eksistensi lain
2. Eksistensi wajib adalah sebab pertama bagi eksistensi yang mungkin.

Dengan menerapkan dua hasil ini kita akan memberikan ilustrasi selanjutnya dan memantapkan sifat negatif dan sifat posistif dari eksistensi wajib melalui argumentasi yang mudah diketahui dan terkait dengan argumentasi sebelumnya.

Sifat abadi Tuhan

Jika sebuah eksistensi adalah sebuah akibat, yang tergantung dan membutuhkan eksistensi lain, maka eksistensi yang membutuhkan ini akan hadir setelah adanya sebab. Jika sebab tersebut tidak ada atau tidak terwujud maka tidak akan ada akibat (eksistensi). Dengan kata lain, bagi sebuah eksistensi untuk menjadi tidak eksis (tidak ada) dalam sebuah interval waktu, menunjukkan bahwa itu adalah sebuah eksistensi yang tergantung dan eksistensi yang mungkin. Karena eksistensi yang wajib eksis dengan esensinya sendiri dan tidak membutuhkan satupun eksistensi lain untuk keberadaannya, ia akan selalu ada dan karena itu ia tidak seperti eksistensi yang mungkin.

Dengan alat argumentasi di atas, seseorang dapat membukti -kan lagi dua sifat eksistensi wajib:

  1. Tuhan adalah tanpa permulaan, berarti bahwa Dia tidak pernah memiliki sebuah pendahuluan sebagai non-eksistensi.
  2. Tuhan adalah tanpa akhir, berarti bahwa ia tidak akan pernah menjadi ‘non-eksistensi’ (tidak ada).

Kadang-kadang dua sifat tersebut disebutkan bersama-sama disebut sebagai ‘keabadian’ (sarmady). Oleh karena itu setiap eksistensi yang mempunyai sebuah masa lalu sebagai non-eksistensi atau mempunyai kemungkinan untuk menjadi tidak ada, tidak akan pernah menjadi eksistensi yang wajib. Fakta-fakta ini akan membuktikan bahwa anggapan materi (maddah) sebagai eksistensi wajib adalah salah.


a. Sifat sifat Negative

Essensi lain dari eksistensi wajib adalah terpisah dan tak dapat dilihat, karena setiap campuran (composite) adalah sebuah sintesis atau membutuhkan bagian-bagian untuk menjadi lengkap. Eksistensi wajib tersucikan dan bebas merdeka dari segala kebutuhan.

Eksistensi wajib tidak dibuat dari bagian-bagian. Hal ini karena sebuah benda yang potensial dibagi-bagi, secara intelektual (aqliyah) lalu memiliki sebuah kemungkinan menjadi tidak ada. Telah nyata bahwa Eksistensi wajib tidak mungkin menjadi tidak ada. Karena distribusi bagian-bagian dalam potensi (bil ‘quwwa) dan dalam aktualitas (bil fa’il) adalah khusus untuk hal-hal yang bersifat jasmaniah, Eksistensi Wajib adalah telah nyata adalah sesuatu yang bukan jasmaniah (immaterial). Maka hal ini berimplikasi pada kesimpulan bahwa Eksistensi Wajib tidak dapat dilihat dengan mata jasmaniah dan tak dapat dirasakan dengan indera jasmaniah.

Dengan memisahkan eksistensi jasmaniah dari Eksistensi Wajib, beberapa kemungkinan lain juga terbatalkan. Eksistensi wajib kemudian tidak terbatas pada atau menjadi subjek dalam waktu (zaman) dan ruang/tempat (makan). Pembatalan ini adalah karena ruang adalah terbayangkan untuk sebuah benda, yang mempunyai sebuah tubuh, dan dengan kata lain setiap objek temporal mempunyai kemungkinan untuk terbagi-bagi dalam interval. Karena temporalitas (kesementaraan waktu) bukanlah sifat Eksistensi Wajib, transisi, pertumbuhan dan gerak juga tidak berlaku bagi-Nya, karena tidak akan ada gerakan tanpa berada dalam ruang dan waktu.

Berdasarkan hal di atas, mereka yang percaya kepada anggapan bahwa Tuhan berada dalam singasana, turun dari langit ke bumi dan dapat dilihat dengan mata telanjang adalah menganggap Dia sebagai subjek dalam ruang, pertumbuhan dan gerakan. Hal ini menunjukan bahwa mereka telah gagal untuk sepenuhnya memahami pengetahuan yang benar tentang Tuhan. Secara umum berbicara mengenai setiap konsep yang menunjukkan ketidaksempurnaan, kebutuhan atau keterbatasan adalah tertolak dari ke-Maha Kuasa-an Tuhan dan hal itu dikelompokkan sebagai ‘sifat-sifat negatif ‘Tuhan.

b. Penyebab yang memberikan eksistensi

Kesimpulan yang muncul dari argumentasi di atas adalah bahwa eksistensi wajib adalah alasan atau penyebab bagi eksistensi yang mungkin.

Kami kini bermaksud menentukan berbagai jenis penyebab yang berbeda-beda dan kekhususan penyebab yang menganugrah-kan eksistensi.

Penyebab, dalam makna yang biasa, berarti bahwa setiap eksistensi adalah tergantung pada eksistensi lain, dan memasukan persyaratan dan keadaan lingkungannya. Tuhan tidak mempunyai penyebab, artinya bahwa Dia tidak tergantung kepada satupun eksistensi lain, juga tidak membutuhkan persyaratan bagi-Nya untuk menjadi wujud. Tuhan adalah penyebab bagi penciptaan dan mempunyai sifat menganugrahkan eksistensi. Hal ini dikenal sebagai jenis khusus penyebab efisien (‘illliyah fa’ileyyah).

Sebelum menjelaskan penyebab ini, para pembaca perlu mempelajari beberapa jenis penyebab, yang dibahas secara detil dalam buku-buku filsafat. Untuk menumbuhkan sebutir biji, kita tahu bahwa mesti ada beberapa faktor seperti biji-bijian, tanah, air, lingkungan yang kondusif dan faktor aktif (manusia atau alam) yang dapat menumbuhkan biji dan memeliharanya. Semua agen-agen tersebut adalah mengenai alasan-alasan dan penyebab-penyebab yang beragam yang membantu tanaman untuk tumbuh.

Penyebab yang beragam tersebut dapat diklasifikasikan menjadi beberapa kategori yang khas, sebagai contoh: penyebab yang secara terus menerus dibutuhkan bagi eksistensi dari sebuah akibat yang dikenal sebagai ‘penyebab riil’ (al-‘ill’ah al haqiqiyyah).

Kelangsungan hidup eksistensi dari sebuah akibat adalah tidak tergantung kepada kelangsungan hidup penyebab tersebut (seperti petani bagi tanaman), jenis penyebab ini dikenal sebagai ‘penyebab yang mempersiapkan’ (the preparatory cause / ‘illah mu’edah).

Penyebab-penyebab yang mempunyai sebuah kemungkinan alternatif, dikenal sebagai penyebab substitutif (the substitute causes / ‘illah in’hesariyyah).

Walaupun ada penyebab-penyebab jenis-jenis lain, yang sangat berbeda dari contoh-contoh di atas dan dapat diketemukan melalui jiwa kita dan fungsi-fungsinya. Ketika seseorang membayangkan sesuatu atau bermaksud melakukan sesuatu, dia telah mempunyai apa yang disebut ‘bayangan’ (image) dalam pikirannya (al-surah thehniyyah), yang diaktualisasikan dengan perantaraan ‘kehendak’, yang tergantung kepada eksistensi (keberadaan) jiwa. Karena hal itu bergantung, hal itu dikenal sebagai sebuah akibat, tapi akibat ini adalah sebuah akibat yang tidak bebas merdeka dari segala penyebab dan tidak mempunyai eksistensi dengan sendirinya.

Aktifitas jiwa berkenaan dengan ‘kehendak’ dan ‘pikiran’ (idea) adalah bersyarat pada beberapa elemen terbatas, yang mewujud dari eksistensi yang mungkin. Ketika aktifitas ini dibandingkan dengan aktifitas eksistensi wajib, kita menyadari bahwa eksistensi wajib adalah Maha Agung dan Maha Mulia, dan tiada bandingan bagi-Nya dan setiap akibat tergantung kepada-Nya secara total.


c. Kekhususan penyebab yang menganugrahkan eksistensi.

Mengingat pertimbangan-pertimbangan yang telah kita bicarakan di atas kita dapat mengklasifikasikan beberapa gambaran unik penyebab yang menganugrahkan eksistensi:

  1. ‘Penyebab yang menganugrahkan eksistensi’ mestilah lengkap dalam kesempurnaannya yang eksis dalam akibat-akibat menuju pengertian yang mutlak. Hal ini adalah karena penyebab dapat menyediakan kebutuhan-kebutuhan yang diperlukan bagi eksistensi sebagai lawan dari penyebab material dan penyebab persiapan, yang hanya menciptakan lingkungan. Tidaklah perlu bagai penyebab-penyebab ini untuk memiliki kesempurnaan relatif dari akibat-akibat; sebagai contoh: tidaklah perlu bagi tanah untuk memiliki kesempurnaan tanaman atau orang tua untuk memiliki kesempurnaan anak-anaknya. Maka Tuhan yang menganugrahkan penciptaan mestilahmutlak sempurna dalam esensi-Nya.
  2. ‘Penyebab Yang menganugrahkan eksistensi’ membawa akibat-akibat-Nya dari non-eksistensi (ketiadaan) kepada eksistensi (keberadaan), akibat-akibat itu diciptakan, dengan perantaraan yang tidak akan mengurangi dan menghilangkan apapun dari ‘Eksistensi (Tuhan) Penyebab yang menganugrahkan eksistensi’.
  3. ‘Penyebab Yang menganugrahkan eksistensi’ adalah penyebab riil yang akibat-akibat sepenuhnya bergantung kepada kelangsungan-Nya, sebagai lawan dari penyebab persiapan yang kelangsungan akibatnya tidak tergantung padanya.

Di atas landasan inilah kita dapat menyangkal klaim yang dibuat oleh beberapa theolog Sunni yang menyatakan bahwa alam semesta tidak membutuhkan Tuhan untuk kelangsungannya, seperti yang dikatakan oleh para filosof Barat yang mengklaim bahwa dunia (alam) adalah seperti sebuah jam, yang telah dibuat dan ditinggalkan untuk beroperasi bebas dari Tuhan.

Sebaliknya, alam semesta tergantung keseluruhannya kepada Tuhan, dan jika Dia menahan atau melepaskan Ke-Agung-annya sesaat saja, maka seluruh makhluk akan musnah.

Pelajaran Sembilan
Sifat-sifat Tuhan

Pendahuluan
Sifat-sifat esensi dan sifat-sifat perbuatan
Pembuktian untuk sifat-sifat esensi
a) Maha Hidup (‘hayat)
b) Maha Mengatahui (‘ilm)
c) Maha Kuasa (qudrah)


Pendahuluan

Tuhan adalah penyebab utama (primal cause) dan penganugrah eksistensi. Dia sepenuhnya memiliki kesempurnaan dan bertanggung jawab atas segala kesempurnaan yang kita saksikan dalam eksistensi, tanpa sedikitpun mengurangi kesempurnaan esensi-Nya. Sebagai contoh, hal ini adalah seperti seorang guru yang mengajari muridnya dengan ilmu pengetahuan yang ia miliki tanpa ia kehilangan sedikitpun pengetahuannya tersebut.

Bagaimanapun juga kesempurnaan ontologis Tuhan Yang Maha Kuasa adalah jauh lebih tinggi dari contoh bandingan tersebut. Sebuah deskripsi yang lebih akurat dapat dikatakan bahwa penciptaan adalah tidak lain dari pada perwujudan dan pancaran esensi suci Tuhan. Al Qur’an telah mengakatakan:

“Allah Cahaya langit dan bumi.”. ( QS An Nuur, 24-35 )

Karena kesempurnaan Allah adalah abadi, maka setiap konsep yang menyebutkan kesempurnaan tanpa menghadirkan sedikitpun kekurangan atau keterbatasan adalah benar bagi Allah. Selanjutnya dalam ayat-ayat Al Qur’an ak Karim, ada cerita suci dan permohonan doa dari Yang Maksum (as), konsep seperti Cahaya (nur), Kesempurnaan (kamal), Keindahan (jamal), Cinta (hubb) dan Kebahagiaan (bahjat), dll. yang semuanya terkait dengan Tuhan.

Buku-buku filsafat dan theologi telah menggolongkan sifat-sifat Tuhan ke dalam dua kelompok (sifat-sifat esensial dan sifat-sifat perbuatan). Kami akan menyajikan sebuah penjelasan ringkas tentang dua kelompok sifat tersebut, yang diikuti dengan sebuah diskusi dan pembuktian untuk memantapkan mana yang paling penting.

Sifat-sifat esensial dan sifat-sifat perbuatan

Sifat-sifat terkait dengan Tuhan Yang Maha Luhur, adalah konsep-konsep yang diabstraksikan dari esensi ilahiyah dengan memfokuskan pada satu jenis kesempurnaan ontologis, seperti: Maha Hidup (Hayat), Maha Mengetahui (Ilm) dan Maha Kuasa, atau konsep-konsep yang diabstraksikan dari sejenis hubungan antara Tuhan dengan Makhluk-makhluk-Nya, seperti, Maha Pencipta dan Maha Pemelihara.

Konsep kelompok pertama disebut dengan sifat-sifat esensial (the attributes of essence) dan kelompok kedua disebut sebagai sifat-sifat perbuatan (the attributes of action).

Perbedaan esensial antara dua kelompok sifat ini adalah bahwa konsep kelompok pertama berkenaan dengan kualitas esensi Ketuhanan Yang Maha Suci, sementara konsep kelompok kedua terkait dengan hubungan dan keterkaitan antara Tuhan dengan makhluk-Nya. Konsep tersebut disarikan dari ketergantungan makhluk terhadap Penciptanya, yaitu: Yang Maha Pencipta, Maha Pemelihara, Yang Awal.

Sifat-sifat esensial Tuhan yang paling penting adalah Maha Hidup, maha Mengetahui, dan Maha Kuasa. Bagaimana pun juga jika mendengar dan melihat dianggap sebagai memiliki kekuatan (kemampuan) untuk melihat dan mendengar atau menjadi peduli terhadap pendengaran dan penglihatan, semua itu akan kembali kepada sifat-sifat esensial. Namun jika makna dari sifat-sifat tersebut adalah terkait dengan sebuah aktifitas yang disarikan karena sebuah hubungan antara yang melihat sebuah objek dan yang mendengar sebuah suara, maka itu akan berkenaan dengan sifat-sifat perbuatan.

Kadang-kadang sifat Maha Mengetahui digunakan dalam cara tersebut dan dianggap sebagai pengetahuan aktif (Al-Ilm al-faily).

Beberapa ulama theologi menganggap Berbicara dan Berkehendak sebagai sifat-sifat esensial, yang akan didiskusikan kemudian..

Pembuktian sifat-sifat esensial

Cara yang paling sederhana untuk membuktikan bahwa Tuhan adalah Maha Hidup, Maha Berkuasa dan Maha Mengetahui, adalah pertama dengan menyadari ketika konsep tersebut juga digunakan bagi makhluk, ini adalah kesempurnaan ontologis, yang merujuk kepada-Nya. Yang lebih utama dan sempurna dari kesempurnaan ontologis tersebut mestilah berada di dalam sebab-sebab yang telah memberikan eksistensi.

Sang Maha Pencipta mestilah sepenuhnya memiliki semua kesempurnaan yang ada di dalam penciptaan, karenanya tidaklah mungkin bahwa penyedia atau pemberi kehidupan, tidak hidup, atau penganugrah ilmu pengetahuan dan kekuasaan, diri-Nya sendiri bodoh dan tak berdaya.

Eksistensi kesempurnaan ontologis ini dalam makhluk maka menunjukan kehadiran mereka di dalam Pencipta yang Maha Tinggi tanpa satupun pembatasan atau kekurangan. Dengan kata lain Tuhan Yang Maha Agung, memiliki sifat-sifat abadi Maha Hidup, Maha Mengetahui dan Maha Kuasa, Kami sekarang akan menyajikan penjelasan singkat mengenai sifat-sifat ini.

a. Maha Hidup (‘hayat)

Konsep ini (Kehidupan) digunakan untuk menegaskan dua kelompok makhluk: tetumbuhan, yang mempunyai ciri-ciri pertumbuhan, dan untuk manusia dan hewan, yang ciri sifatnya memiliki kehendak dan kesadaran. Pengertian pertama tidak dapat disandangkan kepada Tuhan sebab ini terbatas dan tidak sempurna, karena tetumbuhan membutuhkan faktor eksternal untuk perkembangan dan pertumbuhannya untuk mencapai kesempurnaannya, dan hal ini berkenaan dengan sifat-sifat negatif Tuhan sebagaimana telah disebutkan dalam pelajaran terdahulu. Bagaimana pun juga pengertian kedua dari kehidupan, walaupun hal itu mengandung keterbatasan dan cacat, dapat diterapkan kepada Tuhan, namun dengan mempertimbangkan ketidak-terbatasannya.

Secara fundamental, kehidupan adalah karakteristik esensial dari eksistensi immaterial. Seperti ilmu pengetahuan dan aktifitas, yang selalu melekat bersama kehidupan adalah immaterial.

Walaupun kehidupan terkait makhluk hidup material, dalam kenyataannya ini adalah sifat spiritual dari sebuah makhluk material dan jasad material dalam akibat darinya (the spirit / ruh), yang berkaitan sebagai kehidupan (penerapan sifat-sifat hidup kepada eksistensi material adalah sementara). Dengan kata lain, hanya karena kemajuan adalah esensial bagi eksistensi material, maka secara sama, hidup adalah esensial bagi eksistensi immaterial. Dengan memfokuskan pada subjek ini, argumentasi lain dapat ditegakkan, bahwa karena esensi suci Tuhan adalah immaterial dan semua eksistensi immaterial memiliki sifat-sifat esensial kehidupan, oleh karena itu Tuhan mempunyai sifat-sifat esensi kehidupan.

b. Pengetahuan (‘ilm)

Konsep pengetahuan adalah yang paling jelas nyata dan terbukti dengan sendirinya dari semua konsep, namun rujukan konsep ini di dalam makhluk adalah terbatas dan kurang (tidak sempurna), dan dengan kekhususan ini tidaklah mungkin untuk mengeneralisir hal ini Bagi Tuhan yang Maha Tinggi. Bagaimana pun juga, hal ini sebelumnya telah menunjukkan bahwa intelek (akal), untuk kesempurnaan ontologis mungkin dapat diandaikan sebuah rujukan (referent), yang tidak memiliki satu keterbatasan atau kekurangan (kesempurnaan ontologis) dan menjadi esensi pengetahuan itu sendiri. Inilah pengetahuan mengenai esensi Tuhan Yang Maha Mulia. Pengetahuan Tuhan dapat dibuktikan dari berbagai sudut yang berbeda. Salah satu cara adalah dengan menerapkan metode yang sama sebagaimana yang digunakan untuk membuktikan semua sifat-sifat esensial. Karena pengetahuan eksis di dalam makhluk, sesungguhnya bentuk sempurna dan paripurna dari pengetahuan mestilah eksis di dalam Tuhan Maha pencipta.

Cara kedua untuk membuktikan pengetahuan Tuhan adalah melalui argumentasi ‘keteraturan’ (order): Penyajian yang sangat teratur dan sempurna atau perwujudan (alam semesta) adalah jelas sebuah indikasi dari sebuah pengetahuan yang tepat dan sempurna dari Sang Pewujud. Sebuah buku intelektual, puisi yang fasih dan semua hasil karya seni adalah tanda-tanda dari kebijaksanaan, cita rasa dan kualifikasi dari seniman, tidaklah mungkin bahwa semua karya itu adalah hasil dari orang yang bodoh dan dungu. Oleh karena itu, bagaimana mungkin seseorang beranggapan bahwa alam semesta yang sangat luas ini dengan segala rahasia dan misteri yang menakjubkan adala sebuah akibat dari satu eksistensi yang tidak berpengetahuan?

Cara ketiga, untuk menegakkan Pengetahuan Tuhan adalah melalui premis filsafat spekulatif, yang tidak terbukti dengan sendirinya, seperti prinsip ‘bahwa semua eksistensi immaterial adalah mengandung ilmu pengetahuan dengan sendirinya.’, sebagai telah terbukti dalam buku-buku terkait (filsafat dan theology). Memfokuskan pengetahuan Tuhan, memainkan peran yang dalam membangun jati diri (pensucian jiwa), dan dari sudut pandang inilah maka telah disebutkan dalam Al Qur’an:

Dia mengetahui (pandangan) mata yang khianat dan apa yang disembunyikan oleh hati. .(QS. Al Mu’min/Ghofir, 40: 19)

c. Maha Kuasa (qudrah)

Ketika satu agen menghasilkan sebuah perbuatan dengan sebuah niat dan kehendak bebas yang dimilikinya, dikatakan bahwa individu ini memiliki kemampuan dan kekuasaan untuk mewujudkan sebuah perbuatan. Oleh karena itu kekuasaan berarti sebuah agen sukarela yang ada pada awal (mabda’) perbuatannya.

Level kekuasaan adalah tergantung kepada level kesempurnaan dari sebuah eksistensi; oleh karena itu sebuah eksistensi dengan kesempurnaan yang tak terbatas akan memiliki kekuasaan yang juga tak terbatas.

“Sesungguhnya Allah Maha Berkuasa atas segala sesuatu..
(QS Al Mumtahanah, 60: 7)

Bagaimana pun juga kita harus menyadari beberapa point berikut:

  1. Sebuah perbuatan yang datang dari pengawasan kekuasaan harus memiliki kemungkinan aktualisasi, maka satu hal yang secara esensial tidak mungkin atau secara wajib absurd (tidak masuk akal/tidak mungkin) tidak akan pernah punya hubungan atau keterkaitan dengan kekuasaan. Fakta bahwa Tuhan memiliki kekuasaan tidak berarti bahwa Dia akan menciptakan Tuhan yang lain atau bahwa Dia akan membuat angka dua lebih besar daripada angka tiga, sementara nilai dari dua tetap dua, atau menciptakan seorang anak sebelum ayahnya, sementara sang anak hadirnya setelah ayahnya.
  2. Fakta bahwa Tuhan memiliki kekuasaan untuk membentuk segala sesuatu, tidak otomatis berarti bahwa Dia akan membentuk apa saja, namun apapun yang Dia niatkan, Dia akan melaksanakannya, dan Tuhan Yang Maha Bijaksana, tidak akan membentuk suatu perbuatan yang tidak bijaksana, bahkan setelah memiliki kekuasaan untuk membentuk suatu perbuatan tak senonoh.Dalam pelajaran berikutnya kami akan menerangkan lebih dalam tentang kebijaksanaan Tuhan.
  3. Kekuasaan, dalam hal ini, termasuk kualitas kehendak bebas. Tuhan Yang Maha Tinggi memiliki kekuasaan tak terbatas, yang berarti bahwa Dia mempunyai kehendak bebas yang sempurna, yang tidak terpengaruh oleh apapun. ## (Bersambung)

Pelajaran Sepuluh

Sifat-sifat PerbuatanTuhan

Pendahuluan
a) Tuhan Maha Pencipta ( Khaliqiyyah / Creatorship )
b) Tuhan Maha Pemelihara( Rububiyyah / Lordship )
c) Tuhan Yang Layak disembah & di-ibadah-i ( Objek Pengabdian / Uluhiyyah / Divinity)

Pendahuluan

Kita kini menyadari bahwa sifat-sifat perbuatan adalah konsep yang diabstraksikan (disarikan) oleh akal dengan membuat sebuah perbandingan khusus antara esensi ketuhanan yang suci dari Tuhan dan makhluk-Nya dan dengan mempertimbangkan hubungan yang ada antara keduanya. Dalam konteks ini Sang Pencipta dan yang diciptakan (makhluk) menimbulkan hubungan bilateral (dua arah) yang darinya semua konsep penciptaan terabstraksikan dengan sendirinya. Jika hubungan bilateral ini tidak dipertimbangkan maka konsep ini tidak dapat diwujudkan.

Pertimbangan hubungan yang ada antara Tuhan dan makhluk-Nya tidaklah memiliki suatu perbatasan atau keterbatasan, bagaimana pun juga hal itu dapat diklasifikasikan ke dalam dua kelompok umum:

1. Hubungan langsung yang ada antara Tuhan dan makhluk-Nya (seperti hubungan langsung, permulaan dan sumber asal).

2. Hubungan yang merupakan akibat dari hubungan seketika (seperti hubungan yang berkenaan dengan penyiapan kelansungan hidup bagi makhluk-Nya)

Sebelum mensarikan sebuah sifat perbuatan bagi Tuhan kadang-kadang perlu pada awalnya mensarikakn beberapa bentuk hubungan. Hal ini juga mungkin, bahwa sebuah hubungan selanjutnya berdasarkan beberapa hubungan bilateral di antara Tuhan dan makhluk-Nya. Satu contoh adalah ‘kepemaafan’/ Maha Pengampun (forgiveness), yang berdasarkan atas legislasi Ketuhanan (hukum) ilahiyah, di mana masalah kepenguasaan muncul dari Tuhan dan pelanggaran hukum dilakukan oleh hamba-hamba-Nya.

Substansi materi bagi perwujudan sifat-sifat perbuatan adalah melalui perbandingan antara Tuhan Yang Maha Tinggi dan makhluk-makhluk-Nya. Sebagaimana telah ditunjukkan, adalah mungkin bahwa perwujudan dari sebuah sifat perbuatan adalah dengan pertimbangan sumber asalnya, yang memperkenankan hal itu (sifat-sifat perbuatan) untuk kembali kepada sifat-sifat esensial. Sebagai contoh jika Sang Pencipta dipahami sebagai seseorang yang mempunyai kekuatan untuk mencipta, kemudian hal itu dikembalikan kepada sifat-sifat ke-Maha Kuasa-an, sifat Maha Mendengar dan Maha Melihat ditafsirkan sebagai pengetahuan terhadap apa yang dapat didengar dan dilihat, dan ini akan kembali kepada sifat Maha Mengetahui (‘aliim).

Adalah memungkinkan bahwa beberapa konsep sifat-sifat esensial dianggap sebagai berhubungan atau secara aktif terhubung. Dalam kasus ini, hal-hal itu dikenal sebagai sifat-sifat perbuatan.

Konsep ‘pengetahuan’ sebagai contoh, telah digunakan beberapa kali dalam Al-Qur’an Suci sebagai sebuah sifat perbuatan Tuhan.

Bagaimana pun juga mestilah dipertimbangkan bahwa ketika sebuah sifat perbuatan bagi Tuhan diabstraksikan dari hubungan yang ada di antara Tuhan dan suatu eksistensi material, hal ini tergantung ruang dan waktu. Bagaimana pun juga kondisi ini adalah terbatas pada sisi material, di sisi lainnya menjadi bebas dari dan maha mulia jauh berada di luar pembatasan tersebut. Sebagai contoh, untuk mempersiapkan kelangsungan bagi suatu kebutuhan, yang terbatas ruang dan waktu, adalah sebuah karakteristik yang disifatkan kepada kebutuhan dan tidak kepada Tuhan Sang Penjamin Kelangsungan Hidup (Sustainer).

Esensi Ketuhanan Yang Suci adalah berada jauh di balik suatu kerangka ruang dan waktu. Point ini membutuhkan sebuah perhatian khusus dan merupakan kunci bagi banyak kesulitan dan masalah yang muncul di antara polemik para ulama, ketika berusaha memahami sifat-sifat esensial dan sifat-sifat perbuatan Tuhan.

a. Tuhan Maha Pencipta (Creatorship / Khaliqiyyah)

Setelah memapankan eksistensi wajib sebagai sebab awal/pertama bagi penampakan eksistensi yang mungkin, konsep kepenciptaan dapat disarikan dan diterapkan kepada eksistensi wajib, dan konsep penciptaan diterapkan kepada eksistensi yang mungkin. Konsep Pencipta, yang disarikan atas dasar hubungan esksistensial, adalah sama dengan sebab yang menganugrahkan eksistensi. Semua eksistensi yang mungkin, yang membutuhkan sebab ini, adalah kemudian berkenaan dengan penciptaan.

Kata ‘penciptaan’ kadang-kadang dapat digunakan dalam satu cara yang terbatas, seperti ketika mendefinisikan eksistensi material sebagai perbandingan dengan konsep ‘pembaharuan awal’ [‘primordial innovation’ (ibda’) ], di mana eksistensi, yang ada lebih dahulu daripada materi juga dipertimbangkan. Untuk dibawa kepada eksistensi dapat dibagi menjadi ‘pembaharuan awal’ dan penciptaan. Kemampuan Tuhan untuk menciptakan tidak akan pernah dapat dibandingkan dengan perbuatan manusia, yang membutuhkan pergerakan dan penggunaan peralatan, yang terkait dengan perbuatan. Pencapaian perbuatan ini dikenal sebagai hasil dari perbuatan ini.

Bukanlah suatu kasus bahwa ‘menciptakan’ adalah satu hal dan ‘diciptakan’ adalah hal lain, karena Tuhan lebih penting daripada pergerakan dan kekhususan eksistensi jasadi. Jika Tuhan ‘menciptakan’ memiliki suatu rujukan nyata (misdaq‘ainy) berupa sebuah konsep sebagai tambahan bagi esensi-Nya, hal itu dapat dihitung sebagai eksistensi yang mungkin dan hal yang diciptakan di anatar makhluk-makhluk-Nya dan diskusi bahwa penciptaan akan telah diulangi (dalam kaitannya dengan hal itu). Sifat-sifat perbuatan lainnya adalah konsep yang disarikan dengan sebuah perbandingan khusus antara Tuhan dan makhluk-Nya dan konsistensinya adalah hak akal intelek.

b. Tuhan Yang Maha Kuasa (Lordship/Rububiyyah)

Hubungan yang ada di antara Tuhan dan makhluk ciptaan-Nya tidak hanya karena makhluk/ciptaan adalah akibat dari Tuhan, tetapi ciptaan yang dari semua aspek eksistensialnya memerlukan Allah SWT. Makhluk/ciptaan seluruhnya tergantung kepada Allah SWT, dan Ia dapat campurtangan dan mengatur urusan dengan cara apa saja yang Ia kehendaki.

Ketika hubungan ini dipertimbangkan dalam suatu bentuk yang umum, konsep Ketuhanan Yang Maha Kuasa diringkaskan. Manajemen urusan-urusan adalah faktor yang penting di sini, yang darinya beberapa rujukan konsep ini dapat diturunkan, seperti konsep: perlindungan dan pemeliharaan, memberi kehidupan dan menyebabkan kematian, menyediakan makanan atau minuman bergizi untuk kelangsungan hidup dan memberi bimbingan, dll.

Maqom/stasiun Ketuhanan Yang Maha Kuasa dapat dibagi menjadi dua kelompok umum:

I. Kuasa metafisik, yang meliputi me-manage/mengelola urusan dari semua yang ada dan menyediakan kebutuhan mereka – dengan begitu menyebabkan alam semesta.

II. Kuasa legislatif, yang khusus bagi eksistensi itu, yang mempunyai kemauan bebas dan kecerdasan. Hal Itu meliputi masalah seperti menjadikan wakil (mengutus) para nabi, menurunkan kitab suci, menyarankan tanggung-jawab dan kedisiplinan dan pembuatan aturan.

Kemutlakan Kuasa Tuhan berarti bahwa semua makhluk tergantung pada Tuhan. Ketergantungan yang ada antara makhluk juga kembalinya kepada ketergantungan kepadaTuhan.

Ia adalah Yang mengatur urusan-Nya melalui makhluk-Nya, dan Yang memandu eksistensi yang cerdas (melalui akal dan persepsi lainnya) dan menugaskan tanggung-jawab, peraturan dan hukum untuk mereka.

Tuhan Yang Maha Kuasa adalah serupa dengan konsep Tuhan Yang Maha Pencipta dalam konsep terkait, bagaimanapun dengan perbedaan bahwa kadang-kadang hubungan antara makhluk adalah juga dipertimbangkan, seperti tersebut di awal ketika mendiskusikan keberlangsungan hidup.

c. Ketuhanan (uluhiyyah)

Berkenaan dengan konsep Tuhan (illah) dan ketuhanan (Uluhiyyah), beberapa wacana telah dibahas, yang direkam di dalam buku-buku tafsir al-Qur’an. Makna yang lebih disukai oleh kita untuk Tuhan (illah) adalah: Sesuatu yang disembah (Ma’abud), atau Sesuatu Yang pantas untuk disembah dan ditaati ( salih lil ‘ ibadah wa ita’a’ah). Ini adalah cara yang sama dengan konsep: ’suatu buku’ berarti suatu yang ditulis dan suatu hal yang mempunyai suatu keunggulan yang tertulis.

Menurut makna tersebut, sifat Ketuhanan harus diringkas melalui hubungan pertanggungjawaban, kewajiban dan pemujaan atau penyembahan. Walaupun mereka yang tersesat sudah mengenali dewata/tuhan palsu bagi diri mereka, satu-satunya yang berhak/layak disembah adalah Tuhan Yang telah menciptakan mereka, dan itu adalah Tuhan Pencipta alam semesta. Terlepas dari mengenali Tuhan sebagai Eksistensi Yang diperlukan Adanya (necessary existent), Pencipta, Yang Maha Kuasa dan Pemula, tiap-tiap individu harus mengetahui bahwa Ia (Allah) adalah pantas untuk disembah (diibadahi). Oleh karenanya inilah seluruh aspek yang dikenal di dalam kesaksian Islam: ‘ Tidak ada tuhan (ilahi) selain Allah ( La ilaha illa Allah).

Pelajaran Sebelas

Sifat-sifat Perbuatan Tuhan

Pendahuluan

Kehendak (iradah)

a) Maha Bijaksana (hikmah)

b) Maha Berbicara (kalam)

c) Maha Benar (sidq)

Pendahuluan

Masalah Kehendak Tuhan adalah suatu hal yang telah sering diperdebatkan. Berbagai pandangan telah dibahas dan diperdebatkan secara berlebihan, seperti apakah hal itu dianggap sebagai suatu sifat esenssial (inti sari) atau sifat perbuatan, apakah hal itu ada sejak awal (pre-existent/qadim) atau sementara (haadith) dan apakah hal itu bentuk tunggal atau jamak, dll.

Batas luar dan unsur-unsur ‘Kehendak’ tersebut, dan terutama ‘Kehendak Tuhan’, dibahas di dalam filsafat. Topik ini adalah sangat luas dan tidak bisa dibahas di sini secara detil, tetapi kita akan menyediakan suatu definisi ringkas konsep ‘Kehendak’, yang diikuti oleh suatu diskusi ringkas mengenai batas luar ‘Kehendak Tuhan’.

Maha Berkehendak

Ekspresi ‘Kehendak’ dalam penggunaan yang umum diterapkan paling tindak dalam dua cara: yang pertama, adalah pengharapan atau keinginan, dan yang lainnya adalah memutuskan untuk melaksanakan suatu tindakan. Makna yang pertama adalah lebih luas dibandingkan makna yang kedua, sebab makna yang pertama meliputi menginginkan tindakan diri sendiri, tindakan dari yang lain dan menginginkan berbagai hal di dunia yang eksternal. Makna yang kedua bagaimanapun meliputi hanya tindakannya sendiri.

Kehendak dalam pengertian yang pertama adalah setara dengan cinta kasih (muwaddah) kepada apapun juga derajat tingkatannya. Di dalam kasus manusia adalah dari kualitas kebetulan dan fisikal (kaif nafsany) dan dapat diringkas dalam suatu pengertian yang tak terbatas (sebagai konsep umum) melalui bantuan akal. Konsep umum ini dapat berlaku untuk eksistensi yang substansiil (muwjudat juwhareyyah) dan bahkan untuk Tuhan, Yang Maha Tinggi, seperti yang dibahas sebelumnya berkenaan dengan pengetahuan. Dari sudut pandang ini kita dapat mempertimbangkan cinta (hubb), yang dapat diterapkan bagi Cinta Tuhan dalam hubungan dengan inti sari (esensi)-Nya (atau dengan kata lain Tuhan mencintai Esensi-Nya sendiri) sebagai suatu sifat esensi. Karenanya Kehendak Tuhan berarti cinta kesempurnaan ontologis yang pada tingkatan awal diarahkan untuk kesempurnaan Tuhan dan pada tingkatan bawahan diarahkan untuk kesempurnaan eksistensi, yang meluap dari kebaikan dan kesempurnaan Esensi Ketuhanan.

Bagaimana pun makna kedua dari Kehendak, yang membutuhkan pembuatan keputusan untuk mewujudkan sebuah tindakan, adalah suatu sifat perbuatan karena hal itu terkait dengan keputusan yang terkait dengan waktu dan mempunyai suatu kualifikasi keruangan. Lebih lanjut al-Qur’an al Karim juga menggunakan makna ini dalam beberapa kesempatan seperti :

“Sesungguhnya perintah-Nya apabila Dia menghendaki sesuatu, hanyalah berkata kepadanya: ‘Jadilah!’ maka terjadilah dia.” (QS Surat Yasin, 36 : 82)

Penting diingat bahwa terkait dengan sifat perbuatan Tuhan, hal ini tidak berarti bahwa sebuah perubahan telah terjadi di dalam esensi ketuhanan atau bahwa suatu kualitas aksidental telah terjadi untuk menyusun/menperkembangkan Tuhan. Dengan kata lain hal itu dapat dipertimbangkan sebagai sebuah hubungan dengan sifat perbuatan yang diterapkan kepada Tuhan, yang disarikan dengan membandinkan perbuatan penciptaan kepada esensi Tuhan.

Mengenai Kehendak, hubungan, yang dijadikan pertimbangan, adalah bahwa sesuatu yang diciptakan telah diciptakan dari aspek yang mempunyai kebaikan, kesempurnaan dan kemanfaatan (maslahat). Keberadaan mereka adalah dalam ruang dan waktu tertentu dan terkait dengan pengetahuan Tuhan dan cinta. Dia menciptakan mereka diluar keinginan nafsu-Nya dan bukan karena Dia terpaksa melakukan hal itu. Pengamatan terhadap hubungan ini menjadi alasan bagi abstraksi konsep terkait yang disebut Kehendak, yang berada dalam hubungan dengan sesuatu hal yang terbatas dan terlarang menjadi terbatas dan terlarang. Oleh karena itu konsep relatif (mafhuwm idafiy) adalah memberikan sifat temporalitas dan keberagaman.

a. Maha Bijaksana

Menjadi sangat terang melalui penjelasan yang diberikan berkenaan dengan ‘Kehendak Tuhan’, bahwa kehendak Tuhan tidaklah terkait dengan menciptakan sesuatu secara absurd; malahan hal ini secara mendasar lebih terkait dengan aspek kebaikan dan kesempurnaan dari sesuatu itu.

Meskipun demikian dalam kaitannya dengan fakta bahwa ada benturan perihal, hasil dari dalam pembusukan dan pembinasaannya, penentuan Cinta Tuhan untuk kesempurnaan adalah bahwa keseluruhan penciptaan adalah dalam yang suatu cara sedemikian sehingga mereka menerima sebanyak mungkin kesempurnaan dan kebaikan. Dengan pertimbangan atas hubungan jenis ini, kita dapat memahami konsep kebermanfaatan, yang tidak berada dengan bebas dari eksistensi ciptaan, dan oleh karena itu tidak akan menyebabkan produksi mereka (ciptaan), jauh dari menjadi agen efektif untuk Kehendak Tuhan ( iradah).

Kita dapat simpulkan bahwa perbuatan-perbuatan Tuhan menemukan sumbernya dalam ilmu pengetahuan, kekuasaan, dan cinta kepada kesempurnaan dan kebaikan, yang merupakan sifat-sifat esensi Tuhan, hal-hal itu akan selalu terwujud sebagai sesuatu yang bermanfaat. Tipe Kehendak ini (yang ingin mengirimkan kebaikan dan kesempurnan paripurna) dikenal sebagai Kehendak yang Bijaksana (iradah hakimah). Sifat perbuatan Tuhan yang lainnya dari sini dapat diabstraksikan, dengan nama Maha Bijaksana (Hakim), yang juga sebagaimana sifat perbuatan yang lainnya kembali kepada sifat-sifat esensi Tuhan.

Orang perlu ingat bahwa hanya karena pemenuhan manfaat suatu tugas, itu tidak berarti bahwa manfaat itu adalah penyebab yang terakhir (‘illah gha’iyyah) bagi TuhanYang Maha Tinggi. Melainkan hal itu terhitung sebagai jenis sarana untuk mencapai tujuan itu. Penyebab akhir yang pokok untuk pemenuhan suatu pekerjaan adalah cinta ke arah kesempurnaan esensial tanpa batas, yang juga secara subordinat berhubungan dengan kesempurnaan ciptaan.

Maka dari sinilah dikatakan bahwa penyebab utama bagi perbuatan Tuhan adalah penyebab sangat aktif (‘illah fa’ilieyyah) dan Tuhan Yang Tinggi tidak mempunyai tujuan ekstra selain esensi-Nya. Bagaimanapun juga subjek ini tidak bertentangan dengan pemahaman bahwa kesempurnaan, kebaikan dan kemanfaatan dari eksistensi dianggap sebagai tujuan sekunder. Untuk alasan perbuatan-perbuatan Tuhan di dalam al Qur’an al-Karim dianggap sebagai penyebab segala urusan, yang kesemuanya akan kembali kepada kesempurnaan dan kebaikan bagi penciptaan.

b. Maha Berbicara

Salah satu konsep yang terkait dengan Tuhan Yang Maha Agung, adalah konsep ‘berbicara’ (kalam).

Diskusi tentang ‘pembicaraan’ Tuhan, sudah ada sejak masa lalu di antara para sarjana filsafat dan theology dan bahkan dikatakan bahwa karena itulah mengapa mereka menamakan theology sebagai ilmu pembicaraan (ilm al-kalam). Para penganut ilmu ini yang biasa berdebat tentang apakah Bicara-nya Tuhan adalah sebuah sifat esensi Tuhan, seperti yang kaum Ashariyah percayai, ataukah hal ini terkait dengan sifat-sifat perbuatan Tuhan, sebagaimana yang dipercayaai oleh kaum Mu’tazilah. Salah satu konflik keras di antara dua mazhab pemikiran ini adalah apakah al-Qur’an yang merupakan kalam Tuhan diciptakan (makhluk) ataukah bukan makhluk. Hal ini seringkali membawa kedua kelompok ini mengecam satu sama lain. Dengan menfokuskan kepada definisi yang diberikan bagi sifat-sifat esensi dan bagi sifat-sifat perbuatan, menjadi jelaslah bahwa berbicara adalah sifat perbuatan. Untuk mengabstraksikan konsep ini, seseorang harus mempertimbangkan siapakah yang dituju (dialamatkan/mukhatab) dan siapakah yang memahami keperluan pembicaraan melalui sarana mendengarkan suara, membaca sebuah teks, atau dengan memahami sebuah konsep dalam pikiran seseorang. Dalam kenyataannya konsep ini diabstrasikan dari hubungan yang ada di antara Tuhan dan yang dituju-Nya, di mana Tuhan berkehendak untuk menyampaikan kebenaran kepada tujuannya, yang menyadari kebenaran. Bertentangan dengan itu, jika berbicara dianggap sebagai kemampuan atau kekuatan untuk berbicara, maka kemudian itu menjadi sifat-sifat esensi. Jenis aliran ini telah kita sebutkan di muka mengenai sifat-sifat perbuatan Tuhan. Bagaimanapun juga Al Qu’an, dalam pengertian huruf-huruf, kata-kata atau konsep yang hadir di dalam benak pikiran seseorang adalah makhluk (yang diciptakan).

Jika sesorang menganggap ilmu pengetahuan Tuhan sebagai realitas Al Qur’an, hal ini akan menjadi sifat-sifat esensi Tuhan. Bagaimana pun jenis penafsiran ini adalah jauh dari pada pemahaman umum dan tak perlu diindahkan.

c. Maha Benar (Sidq/Truth)

Jika kalam Tuhan dirujukkan kepada struktur dari, atau sebagai sebuah perintah, penyataan atau larangan, kerangka itu keluar dari tanggung jawab praktis dari pengabdian, di mana hal itu tidak dapat disifatkan sebagai benar atau salah. Bagaimana pun juga sekiranya (pembicaraan/kalam) adalah dalam bentuk sebuah ramalan kenabian (prophecy), lalu itu akan disifati sebagai kebenaran, karena Al-Qur’an al-Karim menyebutkan:

“Dan siapakah yang lebih benar perkataan(nya) selain daripada Allah?”

(QS, An-Nissa, 4:87)

Maka tak seorang pun akan punya alasan untuk tidak menerima hal ini. Sifat-sifat ini dianggap sebagai sebuah dasar untuk berbagai jenis argumen (yang dikenal sebagai tradisional dan pengabdian/ibadah), yang digunakan untuk membuktikan topik-topik yang berkaiatan dengan pandangan dunia atau ideologi.

Di sisi lain, argumentasi intelektual untuk membuktikan sifat-sifat ini dapat ditegakkan, pembicaraan Tuhan berasal dari maqom ketuhanan (Ilahiyah/lordship), dan pengelolaan (management) alam semesta dan manusia adalah didasarkan atas ilmu pengetahuan dan kebijaksanaan. Dengan kata lain, ini berarti bahwa panduan bagi penciptaan dan sarana untuk mewujudkan kebenaran bagi yang dituju telah terbukti.

Pelajaran keduabelas

Memeriksa alasan penyimpangan

Pendahuluan

Alasan-alasan penyimpangan

a) Alasan-alasan psikologis bagi penyimpangan

b) Aasan-alasan sosiologis bagi penyimpangan

c) Alasan-alasan Intelektual bagi penyimpangan

Kampanye melawan elemen-elemen yang menyimpang

Pendahuluan

Sebagaimana telah disebutkan dalam pelajaran pertama, pandangan dunia dapat dibagi ke dalam dua kelompok: pandangan dunia Ilahiyah dan pandangan dunia materialistik. Perbedaan utama di antara kedua pandangan dunia tersebut adalah bahwa pandangan dunia Ilahiyah (Ketuhanan) menerima satu Tuhan Pencipta Yang Maha Bijaksana sebagai prinsip fundamental, sementara hal ini ditolak oleh pandangan dunia materialistik.

Pada pelajaran sebelumnya, kami telah membuktikan wacana yang tepat untuk membuktikan eksistensi Tuhan, menegakkan sifat-sifat negatif dan sifat-sifat positif yang sangat penting dan memberikan diskusi berkenaan dengan sifat-sifat esensi dan sifat-sifat perbuatan.

Untuk meneguhkan kepercayaan dengan prinsip fundamental ini, kami akan memberikan kritisisme singkat terhadap pandangan dunia materialistik dengan menegakkan pandangan dunia Ilahiyah (berketuhanan), yang akan menyingkapkan bahwa pandangan dunia materialistik adalah tidak berdasar dan impoten.

Untuk mewujudkan hal ini, kami akan memulai diskusi berikut dengan menyediakan alasan-alasan bagi keberangkatan pandangan Ilahiyah ke arah bid’ah, yang diikuti dengan sebuah penjelasan kelemahan elemen-elemen dalam pandangan dunia materialistik.

Alasan-alasan penyimpangan

Bid’ah, atheisme, dan materialisme telah mempunyai masa lalu yang panjang dalam sejarah umat manusia. Namun demikian, selalu ada jejak-jejak kepercayaan kepada Sang Pencipta dalam masyarakat manusia.

Meskipun demikian, penyebaran kecenderungan anti-agama yang telah dimulai di Eropa selama abad ke delapan, dan secara bertahap menyebar luas ke bagian-bagian lain di dunia.

Walaupun kedatangan kecenderungan anti agama ini adalah merupakan sebuah respon terhadap sistem gereja dan ditujukan untuk menghadapi Kritenitas, namun gelombangnya telah menyapu bagian lain dunia. Kecenderungan anti agama ini, bersamaan dengan industri, seni dan teknologi Barat, telah diekspor ke bagian-bagian lain dunia. Selanjutnya, pada abad-abad terakhir, tranformasi ini dan penyebarannya telah mewarnai secara ekonomi dan sosial; pemikiran Marxist, yang diterapkan di berbagai negara, hasilnya adalah kejatuhan nilai-nilai kemanusiaan.

Alasan-alasan dan faktor-faktor yang diperlukan bagi kemunculan dan pengembangan pemikiran yang terdistori ini adalah banyak, penyelidikan tentangnya akan membutuhkan buku terpisah tersendiri. Namun demikian, hal itu dapat digeneralisasikan ke dalam 3 kelompok, yaitu:

a. Alasan psikologis bagi penyimpangan

Kualitas-kualitas (manusia) seperti tidak bertanggung jawab, kecerobohan dan hawa nafsu untuk mengejar kenikmatan adalah semua kecenderungan yang akan memperdayakan individu manusia ke arah atheisme.

Untuk individu seperti itu, dari satu sisi, hal ini berarti adanya rasa sakit dalam penelitian dan penyelidikan yang perlu, khususnya ketika isu-isu tersebut tidak menyediakan kenikmatan jasmaniah dan material. Maka bagi mereka yang malas berusaha seperti itu, akan menjadi rintangan terbesar dalam jalannya. Dari sudut lain, kecenderungan manusia ke arah kebebasan kebinatangannya, kecerobohannya, kebebasan dari segala batasan dan disiplin, hanya akan semakin menjauhkannya dari pandangan dunia Tuhan (Ilahiyah).

Penerimaan terhadap pandangan dunia Tuhan berdasarkan atas kepercayaan kepada Tuhan Maha Pencipta Yang Maha Bijaksana, akan memunculkan serangkaian kepercayaan, yang akan mewajibkan tanggung jawab atas setiap perbuatan sukarela manusia.

Tanggung jawab ini membutuhkan pengorbangan dan kedisiplinan dalam banyak bidang. Menerima kedisiplinan dengan kecerobohan di dalamnya adalah kontradiksi. Maka kecenderungan ke arah kebebasan hewaniyah, bahkan sekiranya masing-masing individu tidak perduli padanya, menjadi alasan utama yang karenanya akar tanggung jawab terpenggal, dan secara lebih fundamental membawa penolakan terhadap eksistensi Tuhan.

Ada beberapa elemen lainnya, yang menyimpangkan manusia dari keberagamaannya, dan inilah yang menjadi lebih nampak ketika kecenderungan lainnya telah terungkap.

b. Alasan Sosiologis bagi Penyimpangan

Ketika suatu perubahan bentuk nampak di dalam suatu masyarakat, yang secara parsial terkait dengan tokoh-tokoh agama, maka kejadian ini dapat digolongkan sebagai alasan sosiologis. Perubahan bentuk dari suatu masyarakat bisa memaksa orang-orang menyalahkan para tokoh pemuka agama, akibatnya masyarakat yang menjadi tidak puas dengan agama dan doktrin-doktrinnya.

Alasan di belakang ini adalah orang kebanyakan itu secara intelektual lemah, dan tidak mampu untuk menganalisa, menafsirkan dan menyadari pertimbangan yang benar di belakang peristiwa jahat (korup). Mereka berpikir bahwa kekacauan dan kebingungan ini adalah karena keterlibatan otoritas religius dan sebagai hasil dari agama, dengan demikian mereka berasumsi bahwa kepercayaan religius adalah alasan bagi perubahan bentuk dan penyimpangan ini. Mereka sesudah itu menjadi tidak puas terhadap agama dan doktrinnya. (Bersambung, AYS)

Lesson Thirteen
Resolvingseveral spurious arguments
Believing in an intangible existence

a) The role of fear and ignorance in belief in God
b) Is the principle of causation, one universal principle?
c) Achievements of sociology


One of the simplest doubts in the field of theology (knowing God) is how can one believe in the existence of an existent, which is not perceivable?

This doubt is held by the simpleton who finds it hard to grasp the concept of there being an intangible reality. However one will also find reflective thinkers who base their thinking upon the principle of sense perception, and also deny thepossibility of an intangible existence, hence they are also influenced by this doubt.

The answer to this spurious argument is that the perceptions of the senses are due to an outcome of coherence between bodily parts and bodies or substances etc, which is attained by virtue of corporeality. Each one of our senses perceives a particular material form, which is proportional for that sense with defined conditions. In the same way, one cannot expect the eyes to have the sense of sound, or the ears to have the sense of sight and ability to see colours, hence one must not expect our senses to perceive each and every existent.

On the basis of the following reasons we will establish that we cannot perceive all existents through our outward senses:
Firstly, among the material existents, there are things, which are not competent of being perceived through our senses such as: electrical waves or ultra-violet rays.

Secondly, we perceive many realities through other than the means of our outward senses and we confidently believe in their existence. For example, the states of love and fear, or of conscious intentions are psychological stations just as the spirit is not perceivable by the (bodily) senses. Essentially perception itself is immaterial and imperceptible (through the senses).

Therefore just because a thing cannot be perceived through bodily senses, does not invalidate its existence and should not be the reason for such a thing being improbable and remote to the mind.

a. The role of fear and ignorance in belief in God

Another spurious doubt asserted by the sociologist is that belief in God is an outcome of fear, especially of the dangers of natural disasters such as earthquakes, lightening etc. They believe that man in order to calm his mind has imagined an imaginary existence and named it God and started to worship it. Due to this reason, belief in God becomes subsequently weaker as the causes of, and safety precautions against such disasters are known.

Many Marxist’s in their books grandiloquently regard this as an accomplishment of the science of sociology and use this as a means for deceiving many immature people. In order to answer their allegations we would say:

Firstly, the bases of this argument are suppositions made by some sociologists and they do not have any logical ground for validity.

Secondly, in the present century itself there were and indeed are many great thinkers aware of the causes behind these phenomena, and who at the same time have a firm belief in God. Belief in God is thus not an outcome of fear or ignorance.

Thirdly, if the fear of some natural phenomenon, or being ignorant of the causes becomes the motive to focus upon God, then it does not mean that God is an outcome of the fear or ignorance of man. Many psychological instincts such as pleasure seeking or lustfulness become the impetus for philosophical, scientific, and technical investigations but do not negatively affect their authenticity.

Fourthly, if people recognise God as the originator of that phenomenon, whose causes are unknown and if with the discovery of their natural causes their faith becomes weak, then surely it is their view and faith, which is weak. This does not provide us with a valid reason to disbelieve in God, because the reality is that the Divine causation with regards to the occurrences in the universe is from the source of the efficacy of natural causes. These causes are not parallel to the Divine causation

but rather the Divine causation is transcendental to every material or immaterial cause. Furthermore the recognition and unrecognition of natural causes will have no efficacy in establishing or not establishing the existence of God.

b. Is the principle of causation, one universal concept?

Yet another spurious argument put forward by some of the Western thinkers is that if the causal nexus (asl ‘illiyah) is universal, then God must also have a cause. To accept a God without cause is thus a defect in the principle of causation. If we do not accept this rule to be universal then we would not be able to prove necessary existence through this principle, because it is possible that someone could state that the origin of matter or energy was by itself, and through its mutation things originated.

This argument, as indicated earlier in lesson seven is due to the improper interpretation of the principle of causation. It has been recognised as ‘every existence needs a cause’ but the reality of the matter is that ‘every possible existence or everyexistent that is dependent or needy requires a cause,’ and this rule is universal, essential, and unexceptional. However accepting the origin of matter or energy without a cause, and its mutation as the basis for the origination of the world has several controversies, and will be discussed in future lessons.

c. Achievements of sociology

Some believe that the belief in the Creator of man and universe does not correspond to the ccomplishments of modern sociology. For example, it has been proven in chemistry that a certain amount of matter and energy is always subsisting.

On this basis, it is not possible for any manifestation to come into existence from nothing and no existent can be completely destroyed. Those who believe in God believe that God has brought creation from non-existence into existence.

They claim that this same argument has been proven in biology. A living creature has evolved from non-living matter and gradually mutated and reached perfection when it attained the position of man. Those who believe in God believe that God created human beings separately.

We will now aim to answer these controversies:
Firstly, the principle of the continual subsistence of energy and matter is ascientific rule and can only be regarded and applied to those concrete perceptible things. On this basis, philosophical issues such as whether matter and energy are eternal and pre-eternal are not resolved.

Secondly, the subsistence of energy and matter does not imply that one is needless of the Creator, but with the ageing of the universe the more need it has for a creator, because every effect requires a cause. Possibility and dependency are the essence of a possible existent (an effect), rather than it being accidental or temporal.

In other words, matter and energy form as a material cause (‘illah maddeyyah) for the appearance of the universe. As opposed to being an active cause, it is itself in need of an active cause.

Thirdly, the subsistence of certain matter and energy does not obligate the coming into being of a new creation, its growth and reduction. Entities like spirit, life, sense and will etc, are not from matter and energy until their growth and reduction would contradict with the rule.

Fourthly, the presumption of evolution – despite it being scientifically unauthentic and disproved by several great thinkers – does not contradict the belief in God. At its highest level it proves the supportive causation between the living existents. It does not neglect the relationship between them and the necessary existent. It is probably because of this reason that several supporters of this thought believe in God.


Lesson Fourteen
The materialist worldview and its criticism

The principles of the materialist worldview
a) Investigating the first principle
b) Investigating the second principle
c) Investigating the third principle
d) Investigating the fourth principle


The principles of the materialist worldview

In order to define the materialist worldview the following principles can be applied:

    1. Existence is equivalent to matter and materiality. An existent is either matter, having three dimensions (length, width, and thickness) and volume, or it is counted as having the properties of matter. Naturally matter has the capability of being quantitative and divisible. Hence on this very principle the existence of God as being immaterial and supernatural is denied.
    2. Matter has no beginning or end, resulting in it being uncreated and without any need for cause. According to our philosophical terminology it is the necessary existence.
    3. The universe cannot be considered as having a final cause and purpose, because the active agent (fa’il) does not seem to have any intelligence and will for being identified as having a purpose.
    4. Phenomena in the universe (not matter itself) come into existence as an effect of the shifting of material particles, which influence each other. From this standpoint one can recognise the former things as a type of condition and as a preparatory cause (‘illah i’dadeyyah) for the subsequent phenomenon or at-most it can be considered as natural activity among materials. For example, a tree can be known as a natural agent for the fruit that it bears, or the phenomena of 87 chemistry and physics can be considered as the agent. However, none of the phenomena require a divine agent that bestows existence.
    5. The fifth principle can also be added to the above and is related to theology. However from a certain aspect it precedes the other principles and is the only authentic cognition. It is the principle, which comes forth from sense experience. As the experience of the senses only confirms matter and materials, it will thus not accept any other existence.
      Nevertheless we have mentioned in the previous lesson the defects of this principle and it is not required from us to criticise this principle over again, therefore we will analyse the remaining principles of materialist worldview:

a. Investigating the first principle

This principle is the most fundamental principle in the materialist worldview, however its proclamations are nothing but absurd. It has failed to establish any argument for denying metaphysics, particularly on the basis of materialist epistemology, which is founded upon the principles of sense and experience. It is clear that no sense experience, which itself is matter, would be able to articulate in the domain of metaphysics and either deny or establish anything. The utmost thing stated in the logic of empiricism is, that existence beyond the physical realm cannot be established on its basis. It should therefore at least accept the possibility of the existence of this realm. We have indicated earlier that it is possible for man to perceive various immaterial phenomena, which do not have the peculiarities of matter, such as spirit through the immediate knowledge (‘ilm al-hudhury).

Furthermore several intellectual arguments have been established for proving the existence of the immaterial realm in the books of philosophy. The best attestations for the existence of the immaterial spirit are the true dreams, several practices of the yogis, and also the miracles of the prophets (as) and saints.
In any case the arguments mentioned in lesson seven and eight are sufficient enough for proving the existence and non-corporeality of God the Supreme.

b. Investigating the second principle

The second principle emphasises upon matter having no beginning or end and thus being uncreated.

Firstly, matter having no beginning or end cannot be scientifically or experimentally established. This is because the experimental dimensions are limited and no experiment can prove the infinity of the universe from the point of view of time and space.

Secondly, the assumption that matter has no end does not necessitate it having no creator. The assumption of a spatial movement requires the supposition of everlasting force from the moving agent, rather than not needing an impetus for the moving agent.

In addition, matter uncreated implies that it is a necessary existent and we have already established in lesson eight that it is impossible for matter to be a necessary existent.

c. Investigating the third principle

This principle denies that the universe is purposeful. This will naturally result in the denial of the existence of the Creator and consequently once the existence of God the Wise is proven this principle will be nullified. In addition to this, one might question as to how it is possible for an intelligent individual, after witnessing the astonishing order and harmonisation of the universe and the benefits that emanate forth from it, could fail to realise that the universe is purposeful.

Investigating the fourth principle

This principle of the materialist worldview recognises causation as being limited to the material realm and material phenomenon. This view has been severely criticised, the most important points are as follows:

    1. According to this rule a new (immaterial) existent could never come into existence. However we witness the commencement of subsequent existents, especially in the realm of the human being and animals. The most significant of them are life, intelligence, intellectuality, emotions and will etc.The materialists assert that these phenomena are also nothing more than the special characteristics and properties of matter. In order to answer their claim one must say that, firstly the peculiarity that cannot be separated from the matter and from those things belonging to matter is it that it accepts division and it has a magnitude. These peculiarities are not present in the phenomena mentioned
    2. Secondly, the phenomena, which are said to be the special properties of matter, also exist in lifeless matter. In other words matter was lacking these special characteristics and subsequently they appeared. Therefore the appearance of these existents, which are known as special properties, require an originator who has initiated this into the matter. This originator itself is the cause that bestows existence or is the creating cause.
    3. Another serious criticism for their claim is based on their principle, that all phenomena in the universe must be pre-determined (jabr), because by effecting and becoming effected in matter there is no place for choice and free-will (iqtiyar). Opposing free-will in addition to it being against self-evidence (badahah) and commonsense, necessitates it denying any type of responsibility and value for spirituality and ethics. By denying responsibility and any ethical value system, the results for human life are surely clear.
    4. Finally with the understanding, that matter cannot be the necessaryexistence, as already established, one must consider that it (matter) has acause, which cannot be classified as a preparatory or natural cause. Thisis because this type of relationship and correlation can only be imaginedbetween the materials with each other. However not all types of mattercan have this type of relationship with its cause. Thus the cause thatbrought matter into existence is the cause beyond the physical realm,and is the creating cause.


Lesson Fifteen
Dialectical materialismand its criticism

Mechanical materialism and dialectical materialism
a) Principles of the contradiction and its criticism
b) Principles of the quantum leap and its criticism
c) Principles of the negating the negation and its criticism


Mechanical materialism and dialectical materialism

Materialism comes in different forms, and each one has a distinctive explanation for the beginning of the universe and its phenomena. In the beginning of the modern age, materialism by utilising the concepts of Newton on physics, interpreted the appearance of phenomena on the basis of mechanical movement. They considered every movement as an effect of a particular moving force, which entered from outside upon the momentary body.

They assumed that the universe was like a large machine from within which there was a moving force. This force would then transfer itself from one section to another causing the ‘large machine’ to move.

This theory was named as mechanical materialism. This belief however contained many weaknesses and was subsequently criticised by their adversaries. An example of such a criticism was: If every movement is an effect of an external moving force, then there must be an external force for that prime matter (maddah awaleyyah).

This therefore necessitates the acceptance of a force beyond the physical realm (metaphysical), which has become the source for the initial movement in the realm of matter.

Another such criticism was that only conventional and transitional movements could be interpreted as mechanical forces. The phenomena in the universe could not all be limited to spatial changes, and this further necessitates the acceptance of other causes and agents for the appearance of several such phenomena.

The incapacity of mechanical materialism to answer these criticisms caused the materialists to search for other reasons to explain the metamorphosis of the universe. They sought to at least prove that some movement was based on dynamics and that matter was in some way self-erupting.

Some of the founders of dialectical materialism (Karl Marx and Friedrich Engles) by using the philosophical concepts of Hegel, regarded the cause for movement to be the internal contradictory factor of the phenomena. In addition to accepting that matter is eternal and uncreated, and in the acceptance of the universal movement and the efficacy of the phenomena upon each other, they explain their assumption based upon three subjective principles:

    1. Principle of internal contradictions.
    2. Principle of sublimation or conversion of quantity (kamy) to quality (kaify).
    3. Principle of negating the negation or the dialectic of nature.
      It is here that we will give a brief explanation of these principles followed by a criticism:

a. The principle of contradiction

Dialectical materialism recognises every phenomenon to be composed of two incompatible elements: thesis and anti-thesis. They cause the of the phenomenon in such a way that the anti-thesis dominates, synthesising a new phenomenon.

For example an egg, which contains within itself an embryo, eventually develops by consuming the food provided and turns into a chicken, through the processes know as synthesis. Positive and negative electricity are a good example ofcontradiction within the phenomena of physics. Also addition and subtraction is known as antilogy in elementary mathematics, and integral and non-integral are known as antilogies in higher mathematics.

These consequences are also present in the sociological history of man. For example, in Capitalism the working class is the anti-thesis for the capitalist class. If they gradually take over, then this synthesis will result in a socialist and communist society.

Criticism of the principle of contradiction

It cannot be denied that by arranging two material existents next to each other, it can result in such a way that one affects the other by weakening or even destroying it. For example we know of the effects that water has on fire. However this outcome is not universal and cannot be recognised as a principle. There are several instances contrary to this rule.

The presence of this type of contradiction between the phenomena is not considered impossible under the understanding of classical logic, philosophy and metaphysics. Rather it is the combination of two opposites in one subject, which is considered impossible. They have brought absurd examples for the combination of two opposites, such as the combination of addition and subtraction or integral and non-integral etc, aswell as the false prediction for the establishment of a dictatorship of proletarianism in capitalist countries.

If every phenomenon was composed of two opposites, then there must be another combination for every thesis and anti-thesis. Each one is a phenomenon and according to the principle mentioned they must have a combination of two opposites. This would mean that every limited phenomenon would have to contain infinite opposites.

However the most basic criticism that can be levied against this assumption (internal contradiction being considered as the cause for movement, supposedly compensating for the flaw in mechanical materialism), is that there is no intellectual argument to support it. In addition to this there is no denial in accepting the existence of a mechanical movement due to an external force acting upon it. Unless of course, it can be accepted that the movement of a football is an effect of its internal contradictions and not an effect of the contact of the foot of a football player!

b. The principle of the quantum leap

By focusing upon the transformations in the universe, we realise that not all these transformations are gradual or step-by-step. In several instances a subsequent phenomenon may appear, but is dissimilar to the former phenomenon, and therefore cannot be counted as a result or outcome of a former movement and transmission. The materialists have interpreted another principle for this process known as the quantum leap or conversion of quantity to quality. They explain that the conversion of quantity occurs when it reaches a special point and causes the appearance of quality. For example, when water increases in temperature to a degree whereby it changes into a vapoury state, and when metal changes its form and state from a solid to a liquid when it is heated to a certain level. Also an example can bethat when conflicts in a society reach a certain level, they can cause a revolution.

Criticisms of the principle of the quantum leap

Firstly, a quantity could never be converted into a quality. At most, it is possible that the appearance of a phenomenon could be conditional upon the existence of a specific quantity. For example, it is not the temperature level of water, which changes it into vapour, (which is another quality), but this change is conditional upon the existence of a certain temperature.

Secondly, it is not necessary that this quantity is acquired as an effect of the gradual increase in the temperature of antecedent quantities. However it is possible that it is acquired as an effect of the decrease of antecedent quantities. For example vapour changing into water, is conditional upon the decrease in temperature.

Thirdly, the qualitative transformation (quality related) is not always sudden and impulsive, rather in many cases it occurs gradually, as the melting of glass and wax is gradual.

On these bases the only thing that can be accepted is that the necessity of a particular quantity is needed for the actualisation of some natural phenomena.

However this cannot be considered, as the conversion of quantity to quality, and one cannot accept the gradual increase of quantity as a necessity for the transformation of a phenomenon. Furthermore one cannot accept this condition as universal for the qualitative changes (of phenomena). Hence sublimation cannot be recognised as a universal rule.

c. The principle of negating the negation

The meaning of negating the negation, sometimes also known as the principle of exploring nature or the perfection of contradiction, is that during the course of change in dialectics, a thesis is always negated by an anti-thesis, and an anti-thesis is negated through synthesis in turn. A plant negates the seed and is negated by subsequent seeds, and an embryo negates an egg and is negated through a chicken.

The new phenomena however, are always more perfect than the former ones, and the dialectical course is always vertical and towards perfection. This is the most significant element in the principle of negating the negation, which highlights the developing aspect with a tendency towards perfection.

Criticisms of the principle of negating the negation

There is no doubt that in every transformation and transition there is the disintegration of previous states and circumstances, before the appearance of a new state and environment. If this is considered as the principle of negating the negation then this principle is nothing but solely a change or transformation. However the explanation -they give for this principle, with which they justify the direction of movement being towards perfection, and upon which they claim that all movements are towards perfection, as well as each transformation of the universe is evolutional, meaning, that every new phenomenon is necessarily more perfect than the previous one- is not acceptable. Is uranium, which turns into lead through the effect of radiation more perfect? Is the plant, which dries producing no seed or fruit more perfect? Therefore the only conclusion that can be accepted is that some natural phenomenon can, as a result of movement and transformation, reach perfection. Perfection cannot be considered as a universal rule for all of the phenomena in the universe.

It would be appropriate here to remind the reader that the assumption upon which these principles were universally established, only define the rules which have already been proven in the natural sciences, such as how the phenomena come into appearance.

However the existence of universal rules does not mean that we are without need of an originator or the cause, which bestows existence. We have already established in our previous lessons that matter and materiality are possible existents and they require a necessary existence.


Lesson Sixteen
Oneness of God

Introduction
Proofs for the oneness of God

Introduction

In previous lessons the essentiality of the existence of God the Creator of the universe was established. In later lessons we investigated the materialist worldview and provided an explanation of their various criticisms. To assume the universe was free from a creator became apparently absurd and the interpretations given were unacceptable.

It is now an appropriate time to expand upon the issues relating to the oneness of God and unveil the flaws in polytheistic thought.
With reference to the appearance and alteration of polytheistic beliefs, there have been distinctive opinions between the sociologists. However none of these arguments can be considered as clear or authentic.

It may be possible to state that the initial reason for the inclination towards polytheism was the appearance of numerous heavenly and earthly phenomena, which, lead to the view that a particular god manages each phenomenon. Some related goodness to the god of good and evil to the god of evil. This resulted in the belief of there being two sources for the world.

From another angle by focusing upon the effect of the light (nur) of the sun, moon and stars, upon the earthly phenomena, they discerned that the celestial objects have a type of lordship (rububiyyah) compared to the earth.

In addition to the above, man’s tendency towards having a tangible God became the reason for creating different idols, signs and symbols for worshiping their presumed gods. These idols and symbols then gradually became the fundamental aspect of belief among the less intelligent. Every nation, perhaps every tribe on the basis of ambiguity and doubt established customs and rituals for idol worship as an answer for the intrinsic tendency of god worshiping. Furthermore, in order to sanctify their animalistic and egoistic tendencies, they molded these tendencies into religious rituals. Such rituals like dancing festivals, wine-drinking fiestas, Epicureanism, etc still exist among the idol worshipper.

However more significant than the mentioned reasons, were the egotistic interests and arrogance of tyrants and authoritarians, which caused them to abuse the beliefs of simpletons in order to expand their power and rule. Furthermore they considered a type of lordship for themselves and also regarded Satanic worship as part of their rituals. Such examples can be seen in the past empires of China, India, Iran and Egypt.

Nevertheless polytheistic religions came under the influence of different factors and discernment among humans. Thus a barrier was formed preventing people from understanding the true perfection, which was supposed to be applied by the divine and monotheistic religions. The Noble Qur’an portrays such struggles encountered by the prophets (as) of God and the polytheists.

On these bases, the foundation of polytheistic belief is to believe in the lordship of an existent other than God the Supreme, for the appearance of some of the universe’s phenomena. Furthermore many polytheists had faith in the oneness of the Creator, and in reality they accepted the oneness of creatorship. However on a lower realm they recognised other second level gods who administrated the world independently, and they called God the Creator, the God of gods or Lord of the lords (rab al-arbab).

These gods, who administrate according to some, were known as angels, and were called by the polytheist Arabs, the daughters of God. Some recognised them as fairies and genies or some regarded them as the spirits of stars or humans from the past, or as a type of invisible existent.

In lesson ten indications were made that creatorship and true lordship are inseparable from each other, belief in the creatorship of God and the acceptance of the lordship of others is not compatible. By explaining the contradiction in this belief, it is possible to nullify the argument of those who held such a view.

In order to establish the oneness of God, the Supreme, many arguments have been demonstrated in the different books of theology and philosophy. Here we are going to demonstrate an argument, which encompasses the oneness of lordship and rejects the polytheistic beliefs.

Proofs for the Oneness of God

The assumption that the universe has two or more gods can solely be imagined through a few possibilities: Firstly it can be considered that every phenomenon of the universe is created and is an effect of all the assumed gods. The second assumption could be that each particular group of phenomena is an effect (or created by a particular god) of one of the assumed gods. Finally the third assumption is that all of the phenomena are created by one of these assumed gods and the other gods are recognised as the managers of the universe.However it is impossible to assume that every phenomenon has several gods. If two or more gods created an existent, it would imply that each of the assumed gods would create an existent. This would result in many existents, whereas in reality there is only one.

If it is to be assumed that a particular god creates each particular phenomenon,this will imply that each phenomenon exists because of its particular god. Furthermore they must not require or depend upon any other existent unless the (dependency) need returns to their particular god. This type of requirement or need must be upon the existent, which is created by that very creator who has created that particular group.

In other words, the assumption of having more than one god necessitates the order in the universe to be multifarious and deteriorating. In reality there is only one order and all phenomena are related and effectual upon each other and at the same time need each other.

Furthermore the present phenomenon is linked with the former phenomenon and every coexisting phenomenon creates grounds for future phenomena. Hence a universe, which is linked and related to each other (interwoven with each other) is governed under a sole order and it (this universe) cannot be an effect of several causes that bestow existence.

Moreover, if the assumption is made that the creator of the creation is one, and other gods are the administrators and governors of the universe, this is also incorrect, because every effect with all its being is established on the cause that bestows existence (illah Mufidha lil-wujud). No independent existent has the means to interfere unless the results and outcomes of effects of a cause are all under the authority of the existence-bestowing agent and take place with the will of the Divine.

In this case none of them would be considered as lord because the true meaning of ‘lord’ means the one who can freely and independently intervene in the creation.

However there is no intervention, but in the dissipation of the lordship given by the Creator and with the power He has bestowed. This form of executing does not contradict with the oneness of lordship because the oneness of creatorship, does not contradict ‘the creating’ with the Divine decree of the Creator. In the Noble Qur’an and traditions we find a similar type of creation or origination based on God’s support and godly power. As it has been mentioned with regards to the Prophet Isa
(as) that:


“ When you determined out of clay a thing like the form of a bird by My permission, then you breathed into it and it became a bird by My permission” 5:110.

And also in another verse we find:

“And those who regulate the affair” 79:5.

It can be concluded that the illusion of having several gods, stems from the comparison made between God and material causes, where many causes are not unusual. However it can never be accepted that several causes can bestow existence for an effect, or that several lords and independent administrators can be assumedfor administrating the universe.

Based on this argument for nullifying this illusion, one must focus upon the meaning and the peculiarities of this cause that bestows existence until it is known that the profusion of this cause is impossible. Furthermore one must contemplate upon the coherence of the creation until reaching the realisation that several gods could not possibly create this type of order, or numerous lords administer this type of universe. Likewise it became clear for some of the qualified and saintly individuals of God, that by accepting Divine authority (vilayah al-takweneyyah) in a setting where there is no independent lordship or creatorship over them, the oneness of God would not be negated. The legislative authority (wilayah al tashrei’yyah) of the Prophet (saws) and Imams (as) is not inconsistent with the Divine legislative lordship (al-rububiyah altashrei’yyah), because it comes with the Divine degree.


Lesson Seventeen
The Meaning of Oneness of God

Introduction
The negation of plurality
The negation of composition
a) The negation of attributes as additional to essence
b) The unity of divine actions
c) Independent effectuality
d) The two important results achieved
e) The resolution of a doubt

Introduction

The word monotheism from the lexical point of view means ‘ oneness or unity ’, but in philosophy, scholastic theology, ethics (akhlaq), and mysticism it has been applied with various different meanings. However it gives the same basic meaning in all of these sciences, but when viewed from different aspects it can be regarded differently, such as ‘the different forms of oneness’ or ‘the different levels oneness’.

The investigation of these offshoots cannot be comprised in these writings. Therefore from this angle it is sufficient enough that we bring the most significant and befitting arguments for our explanation:

The negation of plurality

The initial and distinguished meaning of monotheism is that very believing in the unity of God and negation of plurality and multiplicity outside its essence. This belief is in complete opposition to polytheism, and the belief in two or more gods who are independent and apart in their existence from each other.
The negation of composition

The second terminological meaning of monotheism is to believe in oneness, and to believe that the essence is self-evident and not composed of actual or potential parts (siffat al-salbiyah) (mentioned in lesson ten), because our mind is more familiar with compositional concepts as compared to the concept of self-evidence.

a. The negation of attributes as additional to the essence

The third meaning of monotheism is to believe in the unity of the attributes of essence with the essence of God Himself, and the negation of considering the attributes as being additional to the essence. This is known as the unity of Divine attributes (al-tawheed al-siffati). Furthermore this Divine unity of attributes in the traditional texts is known as the negation of attributes, which is in opposition to those (ash’airah) who have regarded the Divine attributes as additional to the Divine essence, and believed in the Eight Ancients (Al-qudama al-thamaniyyeh).

The proof for the unity of Divine attributes is that, if all of the Divine attributes have separate referents or affirmations then they can be solely imagined through a few possibilities:

It would be either that the referents or affirmations would be assumed to be within the Divine essence, which necessitates the Divine essence being compound, and this we have already proved as being impossible.

Or that the referents are imagined to be outside the Divine essence, and are regarded as possible existents. However if they were assumed as being necessary existents then it would bring about plurality in the essence and polytheism, which cannot be considered by any Muslim. However if they are assumed as being possible existents then it means that the Divine essence, which is deficient of those attributes, has created them and has then later been given them. For example the essence even after lacking ‘life’ creates an existent by the name of life and through this creation the essence comes to life, the same is the case for knowledge and power.

It is impossible for the cause that bestows existence to be deficient of the perfections of creation. More significantly the provision of its creation and the cause that bestows existence retains life, knowledge and power, and is also attributed with the different attributes of perfection!

By the nullification of these assumptions it becomes clear that the Divine attributes do not have distinctive referents and are not separated from the Divine essence. On the other hand they are single self-evident concepts abstracted from the Divine almighty essence.

b. The unity of Divine actions

The fourth terminology used for monotheism, which in the parlance of philosophy and scholastic theology is known as the unity of Divine actions, is that God the Almighty is self- sufficient in His works, He does not need anybody or anything and no existent can aid Him.

This subject is proven with the understanding of the peculiarities of the cause that bestows existence, which is self-existing when compared to its effects, because the effect of this particular cause with all its existence is dependent upon this cause.

This is known in philosophical terminology as the manifestation of need and dependence (‘ayn al-rabt wa ta’aluq) to the cause and the effect does not have any independence of its own.

In other words: Everything that is actualised is because of Him and is obedient to the realm of power, sovereignty, and true and original mastership. The power and mastership of others is in line with Divine power and an offshoot of it. The ownership of a slave’s (‘abd) possessions is perpendicular to the ownership of his master. Hence how can it be possible that God the Supreme requires aid from someone who with all its existence is dependent upon Him.

c. Independent effectuality

The fifth meaning of monotheism is independent effectuality. This means that the Divine creation is not independent from God and the influences that are made by them (the creation) are with the permission of God and under the strength that has been provided by God the Supreme. The only existent that can influence independently – without the aid of any other creation – and in all time and space is the Divine essence of God. The actions and influences of others are vertical to the influences and actions of Him and are at the dispersal of God the Supreme.

On this base, the Noble Qur’an associates the actions in nature and in the corporeal world (like the ownership of humans and jinn) to God. For instance a tree giving fruit, or the falling of rain and emergence of a plant from a seed are all related to God. The Qur’an continuously emphasises that humans must focus upon and realise that these actions in the natural and corporeal world are parallel with the actions God.

In order to bring our mind towards the realisation of this reality we have brought the following relative example:
If a supervisor of a firm orders his workers to undertake a project, and the project reaches success, the credit will go to the supervisor, even though the instrumentality of the project was in the hands of the workers. The supervisor is referred to as the intelligent and effective agent, due to accomplishment of the project.

The original action is also comprised of consequent levels, and from this aspect Divine Will establishes the existence of every agent. From another view they are like mental forms, which are established by the one who imagines. From this point of view the influences of every agent and of the one who influences on a higher level is dependent upon the Divine original will and permission of God:

“That which Allah wills (will come to pass), there is no power but with Allah”. ( 18:39)

d. The two important results achieved

The result of the unity of Divine action is that nothing other than God deserves worship, because as we have indicated before, a being does not deserve to be worshipped by just being a creator or a lord. In other words Divinity (uluhiyyah) is the necessary condition of lordship and creatorship.

From another angle, the result of monotheism in the latter meaning is that the entirety of human reliance must be upon God, and in all of works He must be trusted and solely from Him help must be requested. Man’s fear and hope ought to be from Him, and when the sources for the completion of needs are out of reach, one must not despair, because God is capable of furnishing all needs from His distinctive and hidden source.

Living under such monotheistic circumstances results in mankind enjoying a special Divine authority (wilayah) and having a unique and tranquil soul:

“Surely the friends of Allah – they shall have no fear and nor shall they grieve.”( 10-62)

These two results have already been placed in the verse that a Muslim recites atleast ten times a day:


Thee we serve and thee do we beseech help.” ( 1-62)

e. The resolution of a doubt

It is possible that one may question, that if the necessity of perfect monotheism is that humans seek help exclusively from God, they should not then seek intercession from the saints of God.

The answer to this is that if by seeking intercession from the friends of God in the meaning that they are independent and without the permission of God, acts or fulfils the need of the seeker, this type of intercession is not harmonious with monotheism. However if it is the case that they are the means through which the bounties and mercies of God can be reached, then there is no contradiction in it.

On the other hand these intercessions are considered as the illustrations of monotheism in worship, and obedience, because it has been originated from His command.

Nevertheless, someone may question as to why has God regulated these types of intercession? And as to why God has ordained humans to seek intercession from His saints? The answer to these questions would be that the command of God is with wisdom and the wisdom behind these ordinances can be categorised in the following way:
For the recognition and understanding of the great station of servanthood, motivation for others in the performance of worship and obedience, which are the means of reaching this station.

In order to prevent those who become arrogant from their worship and consider themselves as having a position and station in the realm of perfection. This trait had been found to be in those who have departed from the Divine authority of the Prophet’s household (as) (Ahlul Bayt).

Lesson Eighteen
Free-will and Determinism

Introduction
The explanation of human volition (Free-will)
a) The resolving of spurious doubts concerning determinism

Introduction

As indicated in the previous lesson, monotheism in independent effectuality is of significance in the Islamic sciences, which substantially play a great role in the composition of man. Due to this very fact the Noble Qur’an has emphasised upon this subject several times in different occasions. The Noble Qur’an, in order for the correct realisation of this issue has created distinctive grounds and regarded all phenomena to be dependent upon the Will, consent, and the Divine decree and destination of God.

However true realisation of this subject requires intellectual capacity and developed thinking, and from another side it requires correct teaching and explanation. Those who fall short in their intellectuality or those who did not utilise the teachings of the Infallibles who were the true interpreters of the Noble Qur’an, deviated and presumed that monotheism in independent effectuality means that every causation is specified to God. They illustrated the negation of all causation from any intermediary cause, such as the existence of heat is parallel to the existence of fire or the existence of becoming quenched is created correspondently to drinking. In other words there is no effect of fire upon heat or the drinking of water upon being quenched, and these imaginations are totally against the clearly defined and undisputed verses of the Noble Qur’an.

The unfortunate effect of this intellectual perversion is manifested when the actions and capabilities of man are investigated. This means that the result of this investigation is that all human actions are entitled to God and human activity with regards to its action is completely negated, and due to this, none can be considered as responsible for their action.

In other words: one of the destructive conclusions of this distorted thinking is fatalism and the negation of responsibility for man, which means denying the most important characteristic of the human soul. Furthermore this assumption also becomes absurd and vain for any ethical, legal, and educational system and likewise for the Divine Islamic legislative system. If man does not have any free-will or choice for his actions then there will be no question of responsibility, reward or chastisement for the actions performed. It also necessitates the absurdity and purposelessness of the universe. However, from the noble verses, the immaculate traditions and intellectual arguments, one can understand the purposefulness of the universe. The purposefulness of the universe is to create grounds where humans by their activity, out of free-will, carry out their worship and obligation towards God and reach high levels of perfection, proximity to the Divine and acquire unique mercies from God.

Besides, if there were no such thing as human volition then there would be no meaning of responsibility. There would also be no eternal recompense or bounties for the actions provided. Furthermore the purpose for creation would be defective resulting in the mechanism of creation being as a puppet show, where humans are the puppets acting without any determination, and at the end of the day some are rewarded and some are punished for their actions!

The substantial cause for the expansion of these inclinations was the evil political desires of the tyrannical regimes, which nullified and rectified their ill actions and behaviours and hampered resistance from over throwing them.

From another angle, those who were aware of the weak elements of this thought but had no vision of how to associate between absolute monotheism and the negation of determinism and were also remote or did not benefit from the teachings of the Prophet’s household (as), acknowledged delegation. They regarded human activity to be completely out of the realm of Divine activity. This itself become another branch of distorted thought, which deprived them from achieving great results from the Islamic sciences.

However those who had the capacity to recognise this knowledge, and were aware of the rightful teachers and interpreters of the Qur’an, saved themselves from this distortion. They regarded their free-activity as being due to the power that God had granted them and accepted the responsibility, which was derived from it. From another standpoint they accepted the Divine independent effectuality on a higher level and realised the outcomes of this great wisdom.

In the enlightening traditions of the household of the Prophet (as) under the section of free-will, capability (istita’ah), Divine decree and destiny, we find the denial and negation of determinism and predestination. Also there are many narrations, which have ordered disqualified individuals to avoid delving too deeply into these issues, to prevent deviation and misunderstanding. The issue of Divine decree and destiny comes in different dimensions, which requires an independent research and investigation that cannot be compounded to this writing. However by focusing upon the importance of this subject we will be outwardly discussing this issue. Those who are interested in the precise details of this subject, and its intellectual principles must refer to the detailed discussions in philosophy.

The explanation of human volition

The power to decide and choose is one of the most obvious factors for man, because every man by presence is aware of these qualities, which are undoubtedly identical to other psychological qualities. In addition to this, even if he doubts, then the existence of the doubt itself is understood by the (knowledge of) presence. Hence in this case it becomes impossible for him to doubt with regards to these dispositions.

Likewise every individual who is the slightest bit observant can realise whether he is willing to speak or not, or whether he wants to wave his hand or not and if he wants to eat or does not want to eat etc.

The decision-making in order for carrying out an act is seldom dependent upon the animalistic instincts such as hunger that intends food or thirst that desires one to drink water. Occasionally this may be prompted from the intellect and ambitions, such as an ill person taking a bitter pill in order to gain health or avoiding a certain type of tempting food to remain healthy, or a student on the path of knowledge who for unveiling the truths shuts himself away from the materialistic pleasures and faces numerous difficulties, or a sincere soldier who even sacrifices his life for reaching high levels of objectiveness in offering.

In reality the humanistic value is only known when a prohibition occurs and an individual in order to reach moralistic excellence, eternal spiritual perfections, and proximity towards the Divine acceptance, shuns the animalistic and low desires.

Every action provided that, if it is determined with greater awareness and free-will has more effect upon the ascent and the descent of a soul depending on the realisation of the action.

It is unquestionably correct to say that the capacity of resisting the low desires of the soul in every individual is not at the same level, though more or less man benefits from this Divine gift of volition and will. However through a sufficient amount of effort and extra practice, one can improve the capacity for opposing the lowly desires through this Divine bestowal.

Therefore there is no reason for being sceptical with regards to the existence of human volition (free-will) and will, and one must not become confused with distinctive arguments and doubts that are posited upon this self-evident subject.

Nevertheless, as indicated earlier, human volition is considered as a self-evident principle in the educational, ethical, and religious systems. Hence if this were not the case then there would be no meaning to recompense and chastisement.

The cause for the deviation from this self-evident truth and inclination towards the concept of determinism (fatalism) is due to some spurious doubts, which must be answered so that there is no place left for confusions and suspicions. For this reason we will be attending briefly to these spurious doubts below.

a. The resolution of spurious doubts concerning determinism

The most substantial arguments of fatalism are as follows:

    1. The will of man takes it form due to the stimulation of intrinsic and internal tendencies. The existence of these tendencies is neither in control of man nor the stimulation of it through external means. Thus there is no room for human volition and determination. The answer to this is that the agitation of internal tendencies creates the grounds for the will and decision-making, but does not make the decision to carry out the action. The only way that it will be considered as a compulsion is when there is deprivational steadfastness. The proof for this is that when we are in the process of decision-making, we calculate the pros and cons of the decision or we hesitate in making a decision.
    2. On the basis of the various sciences, it has been proven that tendenciesare hereditary and also that the environmental and social surroundingsdetermine their configuration. The difference in the mannerisms andbehaviour of man is due to the very fact that there is diversity in thehuman social and environmental surroundings. This very reality moreor less is also accepted in the religious documents, thus on these basesone cannot accept that the actions of man emanates from free-will. The answer to this argument raised is that the acceptance of free-will and will does not mean the denial of these aspects of tendencies, but itmeans that humans even after being effected by these environmental,social, and hereditary conditions can still resist and decide at the time ofthe arousal of inclinations. It is certain that the requirement of thestruggle against these tendencies requires much pain and hardship, due to the fact that these are more effective towards achieving perfection,and the rewards after passing these troubles are always bigger. Also thesepsychological complexes and difficulties may affect the level of punishment, diminishing it.
    3. Another one of the spurious doubts of the determinist is that God the Supreme has knowledge of the entire phenomena and actions of man before they act upon it, and that the knowledge of God is impeccable.

Therefore all of the actions have to take place according to the eternal knowledge of God, and departure from them is impossible. On this basis there is no room for free-will and choice for man. The answer to this doubt would be that the knowledge of God is implicated with every action that takes place and the attribute of man being free in his decision-making or having the free-will is also known by God. Hence if determinism is established then it will be against divine knowledge.

For example, God the Supreme is aware of an action that an individual is going to take in a certain situation, not only that but God is also aware of the relationship of this action with the will and free-will of that agent (individual). Therefore the knowledge of God does not contradict the free-will and will of man. Another doubt of the fatalist is with regards to the divine decree and destination, which according to them is not compatible with human free-will, and hence we will be discussing this subject in the following lesson.


Lesson Nineteen
Divine Decreeand Destiny

The concepts of destiny and decree
Objective destiny and decree and epistemic-destiny and decree
The relation of destiny and decree to human volition
a) Different types of influences from distinctive causes
b) The resolution of a doubt
c) The influence of faith upon destiny and decree


The concepts of destiny and decree

The term destiny (qadar) means dimension and pre-determination (taqdeer) means measurement, and measuring and building something to determine a size.

The term decree (qada’) is used in the meaning of bringing to an end, finishing, and judgement (which, figuratively, is a kind of finishing of finishing). Occasionally decree and destiny are used as synonyms in the sense of destiny (masseer).

By destiny it is implied that God has decided the limits and dimensions, time and space, quantity and quality of the phenomena, which are established through the influence of gradual causes and agents. Likewise decree is known as the final and inevitable termination of a phenomenon after creating their grounds and conditions.

According to these definitions the classification of Divine destiny is prior to the classification of divine decree and they are comprised of hierarchical degrees, which include conditions that are immediate, intermediary, and remote and by the innovation of some means and conditions they are transformed. For example the gradual development of a foetus from a sperm to an embryo goes through different stages, which includes distinctive time and space, and finally its deliverance, which is considered from the realm of its destiny. However the classification of instant decree is related to the generation of all factors and conditions and at the same time it is inevitable as the Noble Qur’an has referred:

“When He decrees an affair He only says to it, ‘Be’ and then it is” ( 2:117)

As has already been indicated, occasionally decree and destiny are used as synonyms, and due to this it is divided into certain and uncertain, and from this aspect we find in our traditions and supplications that the decree can be averted through giving charity, supplication and strengthening the blood-kinship.

Objective determination and epistemic-determination

Occasionally the Divine pre-determination (taqdeer) and decree are known as the knowledge of God, with regards to the conditions and grounds for the birth and actualisation of a phenomenon. This is named as epistemic-decree, and destiny (qada wa qadar ‘ilmy). Similarly the objective decree and destiny (qada wa qadar ‘ayni) are known to be related to the gradual evolution of a phenomenon and its realisation in the realm of the external world (its materialisation).

On the accounts of the traditions and the noble verses of the Qur’an, all knowledge with regards to the past and present realisation and future actualisation of the phenomenon in the external world is epitomised upon ‘the safe tablet’ (lawh mahfuz). Those by the permission of the Divine have access to the ‘tablet’ and are aware of the past and future of things. Furthermore there are other tablets of lesser degree in which the incomplete and conditional futuristic knowledge is present.

Those who are aware of this have limited information, which is susceptible to substitution. Apparently the following noble verse asserts upon these two forms of destinies {sarnevest}:

“Allah makes to pass and establishes what He pleases, and with Him is the basis of the Book.”13:39.

Alteration in the conditional destinies is known as change (bada’) in an earlier ruling in the religious text.

At any instance, believing in the epistemic-decree and destiny will not influx any enigmas other than that of Divine eternal knowledge (‘ilm azalee). In our previous lessons we have refuted those fatalistic arguments with relation to Divine knowledge.

However believing in the objective decree and destiny, and particularly believing in determined destiny will influx several doubts and enigmas, which must be resolved. Nevertheless a brief answer was provided in the discussions on independent effectuality.

The relation of destiny and decree to human volition

We know that the requirement for believing in the Divine objective decree and destiny is that all phenomena from beginning to end, and even the conditions of actualisation are subservient to the wise design of God the Supreme. Furthermore the reaching of this phenomenon to its final stage is also in consonance with the Divine will.

In other words the existence of every phenomenon is related to Divine will, without which no existent can come into being. Likewise the beginning of everything is based upon the Divine decree, without which no existent would take the limited forms or reach its (end) final stage. The explanation of these relationships and constituents in reality is the gradual teachings of the oneness of God. This in the meaning of it being independent in effectuality, which is of the foremost level and plays an important role in the being and becoming of man, as indicated in our previous lessons.

However the proving of the origination of a phenomenon by the authorisation of God and even by the will of God is perhaps easier than the final stages of a phenomenon entangled with the Divine decree, which requires more complex proofs. Besides, it is difficult to combine the belief in Divine decree with human volition (free-will) in the building of one’s own future. For this reason the school of the theological scholars (Asharites) who acknowledge the Divine decree, have inclined towards determinist thought, and those who could not maintain this thought, have completely denied it and accepted absolute human volition.

Moreover, they have interpreted all of those verses and the traditions opposing their thought, which can be seen in their detailed books relating to this topic.

The genuine doubt mentioned, is that if human acts in reality are based upon the will of man, then how can one establish the relationship between it and Divine decree? And if it is grounded upon Divine decree, then how can it be known to be the choice of man or be complied with human volition?

Hence on this basis, for the refutation of doubt and for the combination of human volition and Divine will, one must demonstrate the different proofs for proving that an effect can have several causes in a way that the different voluntary actions (fa’il) of man are related to human volition and also to Divine decree.

a. Different types of influences from distinctive causes

The effect of several causes in the appearance of a phenomenon can be imagined in the following ways:

    1. Certain causes next to each other or together make an influence such as the mixing of water, grain and temperature etc. that influences the seed to sprout and grow into a plant.
    2. Each and every one of the causes influence a phenomenon periodically during the stretch of its (a phenomenon’s) life such as the flight of an aircraft is dependent or influenced periodically by several machines.
    3. The effect, which results from certain causes due to the sequential inducement, such as the effect of the intention of man to write upon the hand and the effect of the hand upon the pen.
    4. The effect, resulting from certain vertical causes in such a fashion that each and every one of them depends on other causes (existence). This is contrary to the assumption above were the pen was not dependent upon the hand and the hand was not contingent upon the intention.

In all of these forms certain causes were required for the formation of an effect, hence the effect of Divine will and human will upon the voluntary action of man pertains to these realities.

However, the combination of two separate causes upon an effect (or for the origination of an effect) is not possible, taking into consideration that the causes are those, which bestow existence (‘illah moujidah), or if there is a combination of two causes, the combination of which, is impossible.

b. Resolution of a doubt

With the explanation which has been provided, it has become clear that relating the voluntary actions of man to God the Supreme is not contradictory, however Divine will and human will are considered as being parallel to each other.

In other words, the contingency of the action and the agent is on one level, however their existence is compared to God the Supreme on a higher level, in such a way that the existence of man and the existence of the matter is dependent upon Him.

The influence of human-will as being a part of a complete cause in the accomplishment of a work does not contradict the thought that all parts of the complete cause are acknowledged to God. It is God who has the power in his hand by which He gives the existence to man, the universe and to all affairs, there is nothing that can be considered as being independent from Him. The voluntary actions of man are also dependent and not beyond the radius of the Divine will.

Therefore these two wills are not horizontal to each other and it is not impossible for them to co-exist. Human will in its very existence is dependent upon Divine will and the Divine will is necessary for the realisation (actualisation) of any action:

“And you do not will, except that which Allah, the Lord of the universe, wills” 81:29.

c. The influence of belief upon destiny and decree

To believe in Divine destiny and decree other than it being a reason for the perfection of man in the dimension of the intellect, also has a tremendous effect upon the actions of man. Some of these actions have already been discussed, however we will mention a few more below:

One, who believes in the return of all occurrences to the wise will of God, which is related to the Divine decree and destiny, will never be afraid or confused with regards to these occurrences. Furthermore such a person will not despair at fear and suffering, but will see such incidents as the Divine plan of God, and will gladly receive them and master the great art of patience, trust, consent, and submission.

Moreover the joys and the status of the world, which leads towards arrogance and intoxication, will not carry him away. These are those very effects, which the Noble Qur’an has mentioned:

“No evil befalls on them nor in your own souls, but it is in a book before We bring it into existence; surely that is easy to Allah. So that you may not grieve for what has escaped you, norbe exultant at what He has given you; and Allah does not love any arrogant boaster” (QS 57:22 and 23.

In every instance one must remember that the false understanding of the issue of destiny and decree or independent effectuality will result in the acceptance of oppression, irresponsibility and indolence. However one must know that the felicity and success and also the eternal misfortune of man are the outcomes of his actions.

As the Noble Qur’an has mentioned:

For him is the benefit of what he has earned and upon him the evil of what he has wrought.” 2:286

And also:

“And that man shall have nothing but what he strives for.” 53:39


Lesson Twenty
Divine Justice

Introduction
The concept of justice
a) The proofs for Divine justice
The resolution of certain doubts


Introduction

In the previous lessons we have dealt with the contradictions of the two schools of thought, the Asharites and Mutazilites with reference to the issues of theology, Divine will, determinism and human volition, and also upon Divine decree and destiny. However these two schools frequently held the two extremist positions, and have either exaggerated or underestimated these realities.

Another one of the most fundamental differences between these two groups is the issue of Divine justice and the Shi’ite understanding of this issue is in agreement with that of Mutazilites. They have been known as the ‘adlyah’ as opposed to asha’rah. This topic is of great importance in the field of theology, and is known to be the crux of the matter in theological issues and is even acknowledged as one of the principles of belief for the schools of Mutazilite and Shi’ite.

One must focus on the point, that the Asharites do not deny Divine justice and do not consider God as being unjust or tyrannical (God forbid), due to clear and apparent verses that establish Divine justice and deny any form of oppression from the Holy Divine realm. However the discussion centres around this issue, that the sole intellect without any explanation from Divine law (the Book and the traditions) can standardise Divine actions. Upon this basis it can demand the forbearance and accomplishment of Divine actions. For example: Is it necessary for God the Supreme to take a believer to heaven and a polytheist to hell, or are these decisions based on revelation and cannot be applied by the sole-intellect?

The point of dispute is that very issue, which has been named as good and evil from the point of the intellect (husn wa qubh aqly). The Asharites have denied this and instead came up with the idea that whatever God carries out in the transcendental realm (takwin), it is considered as good, and on the corporal realm, whatever God orders it is considered as good, but not because it is good by itself.

However the belief of the Mutazilites and the Shi’ites, is that action without any subsistence from the corporal and transcendental world, can be distinguish by God as good and evil (husn wa qubh), and the intellect has the capacity to understand good and evil to a certain extent. This understanding results in the belief that the Holy Divine realm is remote from evil actions. However this is not in the sense that God is commanded or ordered, but means that the emanation of evil from God the Supreme is incompatible, and the emergence of any evil from God is impossible.

It is self-evidential that the investigation has provided the answers for the doubts raised by the Asharites with regards to the good and evil, from the intellectual point of view. However the current work does not have the capacity to display them. Likewise it is possible that the Mutazilites have some inadequate patterns in their belief with respect to the good and evil, which shall be investigated in its place.

However the overall belief of good and evil from the intellectual point of view, is acknowledged by the Shi’ites and has been confirmed in the Book and the traditions, and emphasised by the Infallible Imams (as).

From here on we will be explaining the perimeters of the concept of justice and then demonstrate intellectual arguments in order to prove this attribute as an attribute of action for God the Supreme. Finally we will resolve some of the most important issues dealing with this topic.

The concept of justice

The lexical meaning of justice is: to equalise, uniformity and is commonly known as the consideration of the rights of others. Hence the definition would be ‘granting rights to one who deserves.’ Therefore, initially one must conceive an existence, which enjoys right, and then the consideration of its right will be known as justice, and the violation of it will be regarded as tyranny. However, occasionally the concept of justice can be extended and regarded in the meaning of ‘ the performance of work befittingly or as to place all things in its proper place.’

According to the latter definition, justice is tantamount to wisdom and just work is wise work. Nevertheless the determination of the ‘right of the deserved-one’ and what a ‘proper place’ is, involves a vast domain of words, which is usually discussed in the philosophy of ethics and in the philosophy of rights. Naturally this work does not allow us to cover all these peripheries.

However, every mindful person understands that if a person snatches a piece of bread from an orphan’s hand without any reason or kills an innocent person for no reason, they have persecuted and oppressed, and therefore committed an evil act.

Furthermore in contrast to this, if the snatched bread is taken from the tyrant and given back to the orphan, or the killer is punished, the action carried out would be considered to be wise and just. This is true even for someone who does not believe in the existence of God.

The secret behind this discernment and the force that determines the good and evil, and similar issues must be investigated within the different branches of philosophy.

It may be concluded that justice can be conceived from two concepts, which are considered as general and particular: Consideration for the rights of others, the wise performance of work and heeding to the rights of others is an extension to this.

Therefore, the factor that is not necessary for justice is uniformity or equalisation. For example, a just teacher is not the one who encourages or reprimands students equally, whether they are hard working or lazy. A true teacher is the one who nourishes the one who deserve the nourishment. Another example could be with regards to a righteous judge who distributes the property in a feud according to the one who is entitled to that property, but not equally.

Likewise the requirement of Divine justice and wisdom is not that the Creator creates His creation uniformly or equally, for example He does not create humans with horns, wings, wool etc. However the necessity of Divine justice and wisdom is that the Creator creates the existence in such a way that it receives the utmost good and perfection and also in a way that it fulfills the ultimate goal. Furthermore the essence of Divine justice and wisdom is that all human beings are responsible according to their capacity and are judged and rewarded with consideration of their free-will.

a. The proofs for Divine justice

As indicated earlier Divine justice is considered to be a branch of Divine wisdom. From another point of view it is considered as that very wisdom itself and the proof for it is also that of the Divine wisdom, which has already been established in lesson eleven. We will here provide a more detailed explanation.

We know that God the Supreme possesses the ultimate level of power and volition, and can perform any work, which is possible without being under the influence of any existent. However, He will not perform everything, which is possible for Him to perform, but will act only upon that which He has desired and willed.

We also know that God’s Will cannot be absurd or uncalculated, but He desires only that which His impeccable attributes necessitate of Him. He will not create any existent without what is demanded from His ontological attributes. God the Supreme is absolute (pure) perfection and His Will is quintessentially related towards the perfection and benevolence of the creation. If the necessity of existence is the origination of evil and the imperfections in the universe, then it is considered to be one of the consequences of quintessentiality.

However this consequential evil and imperfection is predominated by perfection and good, because it is coherent with the abundant good and perfection (or because abundant good and perfection is quintessential). The abundant good will overwhelms the evil, because God the Supreme is absolute perfection.

Hence the requirement for the Divine attributes of perfection is that the universe is created in such a way, that it overall receives the utmost perfection and good, and from here the attribute of wisdom for God the Supreme is proven.

On this very basis, Divine Will is related to man’s creation when the right conditions are possible and are the source of abundant good. One of the fundamental privileges of man is volition and freewill, which without doubt is an ontological attribute. An existent that possesses this quality is considered to be more perfect compared to one who is deprived of it. However the requirement for being independent is the movement towards eternal perfection through good actions, which can also descend in the direction of eternal loss and misery through bad conduct. The aim of Divine Will is the perfection of man, and this is not possible without free-will. However this provides the possibility of deterioration due to the effect of sensual desires (hawa al-nafs), which take form because of the influences of Satan. Subsequently this deterioration is also associated with Divine Will.

Selection with awareness requires the understanding of good and evil. Hence God the Supreme has ordained for man, that which is beneficial and prohibited for him that which will lead him towards deterioration and decline. Furthermore the requirement for Divine wisdom is that responsibility must be harmonious with the capability of the performer, because responsibility, which is impossible to perform, is absurd. Therefore, the initial element of justice (in this particular sense) means ‘justice in the ordinance of responsibilities.’ This is proven by the reason, that if God the Supreme ordains a responsibility beyond the capacity of his servants then the performance of it would be not possible.

However ‘justice in judgement’ for the servants will be proven by focusing upon the factor of reward or chastisement provided for the action performed according to their (deserving) creditability.

Finally ‘justice in granting rewards and chastisement’ will be established by focusing upon the final purpose of creation. Man has been created in order to reach perfection or imperfection, if God rewards regardless of their work then He has not carried out His purpose.

Thus the reason for the justice of God the Supreme in the true meaning and in all aspects is that the essential attributes of Him cause actions that are wise and just. None of the unjust, absurd, or fatuous attributes are present (exist) in Him.

b. The resolution of certain doubts

    1. How can the diversity that exists in the creation, particularly in human beings be harmonious with Divine justice and wisdom? The answer given is that the diversity in creation is existentially advantageous and necessary for the order of creation. It is consequential to the principle of ‘cause and effect.’The assumption that creation is alike is an immature idea and if we look further we will understand that this type of idea is equal to the idea of not creating. For example if all human beings were only men or women, there would be no birth or reproduction, resulting in the end of the human race. If all creatures were human beings then there would be nothing to consume or sustain our needs. If animals and plants were all of a single colour, we would lose the benefits and spectacular beauties that we find in creation.Appearances of different phenomena in distinctive forms are the results of conditions and these conditions are because of the movement of matter. No-one has the right to make an objection regarding them, before his/her birth in order that He should have given it another form, or different place, or time, implying that there could be space for questioning the Divine justice.
    2. If divine wisdom is the cause of life for the human being, why does God destroy them? The answer to this question is that initially the life and death of existents in this world are the outcome of the relationships of cause and effect, the principle of creation (takwin) and also a necessary element of the order of creation. Secondly, if the living creatures do not die then the grounds for newer creation will not be there and the future generation will be deprived of God’s bounties. Thirdly, if it is assumed that all human beings were to remain alive, the earth would rapidly become a small place to live upon, and the inhabitants due to despair and hunger would wish for death. Fourthly, the true purpose for the creation of man is that he attains eternal felicity. If they do not transfer from this world through the medium of death they will not reach this final goal.
    3. How can the existence of suffering and natural disasters (such as earthquakes, storms, etc) and other sociological hardships (such as war, oppression, etc) be harmonious with Divine justice? The answer to this doubt is that natural disasters are the requirement of action and reactions of matter. As good overwhelms evil, Divine wisdom will not be contradicted. The eruption of sociological hardships andcorruption in the world is due to the fact that humans are free in theiraction. Having a free will is the requirement of Divine wisdom and thewelfare for the society is more than that of corruption. If it were not thecase then there would not exist a single man on the face of the planet.Secondly, the existence of all suffering and difficulty leads man to explore and search for the hidden natural sources and results in the appearanceof sciences and different discoveries. Furthermore dealing with thesedifficulties will improve man’s potential for advancement towardsperfection. Nevertheless if suffering is acknowledged in the proper sensethen there will be a greater reward in the eternal world, and compensation will be given appropriately.
    4. If eternal chastisement is intended for limited sins committed in this world, then how is it compatible with Divine justice? The reply for this question is that between the good deeds and baddeeds there is a relation of ‘causation,’ which has been disclosed topeople through Divine revelation. Likewise some of the persecutions inthis world have extended circumstances such as to blind oneself orothers, which can take place in an instant but the result of this remainstill the end of one’s life. Similarly, great sins also have eternal effects andif a person does not arrange the means of atonement in this world(through seeking forgiveness) then the evil will remain with him forever. As with the case of blindness, which will remain permanently due to aninstant abuse, it does not contradict Divine justice, in the same wayeternal punishment for a great sin does not contradict Divine justice,because it is an action performed with full awareness.


Lesson Twenty-One
The Issues Concerning Prophethood

Introduction
1. The purpose of discussing this section
a) The method of investigation in theology


Introduction

We know that the most fundamental issues to be solved by every intellectual individual in order for him to live a intelligent life is:
1. Where did the existence of man and the universe originate? Who manages this creation?
2. What is the end and where lie’s the purpose of man?
3. By focusing upon the required needs for the realisation of a true path of felicity, what are the means to accomplish such perfection and with whom does it lie?

The proper answer for these questions would be the three principles: oneness of God, resurrection, (ma’ad), and prophethood (nubuwah). These are considered as the fundamental beliefs in all the monotheistic religions.

In the beginning of this book we have provided investigations concerning the issues of theology and arrived upon the result that all creation is created by One being, and all are under the decree of His wisdom and none can in any dimension be ever independent from Him.

This subject has been proven by intellectual arguments and we have explained that these types of issue can only be resolved by the intellect. The arguments and proofs from religious texts can only be accepted when one has proven the existence of God and their authenticity. The establishment of the sayings of the Prophet (saws) and Imams (as) is dependent upon the establishment of prophethood and leadership, which necessitates the traditions being reliable and authentic. Hence intellectual reasoning must first prove the principle of prophethood, and then later the legitimacy of the Noble Qur’an can be used and applied for proving specific issues. The details and the specifics of resurrection must be proven from revelation; nevertheless intellectual reasoning can also be used to prove this principle.

Therefore for the explanation of the issues of prophethood and resurrection one must first establish the principle of prophethood and resurrection through the intellect. Once the reliability of the Noble Qur’an and the legitimacy of the Prophet of Islam (saws) are confirmed then the specifics of these two sections can be proven in the peripheries of the Book and traditions.

By focusing upon the pattern of learning, it is preferable and likeable that we distinguish between these two issues. We will initially discuss the issues concerning prophethood and then explain the topic of resurrection.

1. The purpose of discussing this section

The initial purpose of this discussion is to prove for this subject, that for the realisation of the realities of being, and a true path for living life, there are means other than that of sense perception and intellect, which are accurate (or cannot make any mistake). These are known as revelation, and are types of Divine teaching, which are specified for the special servants of God. The majority of people are unaware of this reality because they do not see an example of it within themselves.

However through the effects and signs they can arrive upon and confirm the proclamations of the Divine prophets and messengers (as). Accordingly, once the confirmation of the revelation upon a person is established then others are obliged to accept and act upon it with out any confrontation. None will be excused except those who have a message especially for them as a group or an individual in a particular time.

Therefore, the fundamental elements of this section are as follows: the necessity of prophethood and the requirement of revelation being immune from any form of domination or personal initiation, until the crux of the matter reaches the people. In other words the necessity of the infallibility of the prophets and the above requirement is needed in order to prove the prophethood of the Prophet of Islam (saws).

After the issues concerning prophethood and revelation through the intellect are established, other issues arise such as the number of prophets, Books, Divine laws and the determination of the last Book, its Prophet and his successors. However the establishment of all these topics with intellectual reasoning is not possible, therefore the religious text must be given as a proof for these topics.

a) The method of investigation in theology

By focusing upon what has been said, the essential difference between philosophy and theology becomes clear. Philosophy discusses only those issues that are established by intellectual reasoning and theology includes those topics that are only proved through devotion and narration (or religious texts).In other words: The relationship between philosophy and theology is of generality and peculiarity in some respect. This means that philosophy and theology share common issues, which are established by the intellect, and uncommon (specific) issues. However for philosophy the basis of establishment is the intellect. In theology it is narration and devotion for the uncommon issues. In other words the method of investigation in theology is through the combination of the intellect and that of devotion.

It is to be concluded that there are two basic differences between philosophy and theology: The first one is that even after sharing common topics (such as the issues of knowing God), they have specific issues that are not discussed outside the specific radius of their own.

Secondly, the method of investigation in all of the philosophical issues is the method of intellectual reasoning, which is opposite to that of theology. In some of the issues of theology, which are in common with that of philosophy, intellectualreasoning is used, but in certain issues narrations are utilised (such as the discussions concerning Imammah). In some issues both (intellectual reasoning and narration) are used (such as in the topic of resurrection).

It is necessary to indicate that specific issues in theology, which are established through narration and devotion, are not on one level. However a group of them can be considered so with regards to reliability and the authenticity of the actions and traditions of the Noble Prophet (saws), which are directly established by the means of the noble verses of the Qur’an. Then other issues such as the determination of the successor of the Prophet of Islam (saws) and the reliability of the words of the infallible imams are established upon the basis of the exegesis of the Noble Prophet (saws).

It is self-evident that the results received from the narration establishments will only be accepted when the chain of transmission of narration is certain.


Lesson Twenty-Two
The Need forRevelation and Prophethood
The necessity for the nomination of prophets

a) The limitation of human science
The benefits of the nomination of prophets

This topic is the most fundamental topic of this section and can be established by arguments comprising of three premises:

    1. The purpose of creation is that by carrying out voluntary actions one should move in the direction of ultimate perfection, which is only possible through the execution of free-will and human volition. In other words man has been created in order to earn and receive mercies from God through his worship and devotion and striving towards perfection. The Divine Will essentially constitutes felicity and perfection for human beings and this is not possible without voluntary action. Therefore mankind’s life is regulated upon two directions -where one leads towards suffering and chastisement, and the other to eternal felicity, these two options are subsequently related (not directly) to the Divine will (iradah) in order to create the conditions of volition. This premise became clear under the discussion of Divine justice:
    2. In addition to physical and psychological abilities and essential conditions, the ability to make a conscious decision requires the realisation of the differences between a true and false path. To intentionally choose a path towards perfection also requires one to decide between right and wrong. Thus Divine wisdom necessitates that mankind is provided with the appropriate tool in order to distinguish between right and wrong to reach perfection. If this is not the case the likeness can be compared to a host who invites a guest without giving him the address of his house! It is self-evidential that this type of action is unwise and a reflection of defect and imperfection.
    3. The usual and common understandings of people, which areestablished because of the intellect and sense perception, are insufficient in determining a path of perfection and true felicity in all dimensions (worldly, spiritual, celestial, and social). If there is no way to compensate for this limitation, then the ultimate aim of man cannot be realised.

By focusing upon these three premises we conclude that the requirement of Divine wisdom is the classification of another path for man aside from that of intellect and sense perception. The bestowal of such a path is for the realisation of perfection in all dimensions. It is the path of revelation, and through the revelation, which has been delivered to mankind by the prophets (as); humanity can benefit and become aware of the true path of perfection.

The third of these premises could be seen to create doubt; therefore we will provide further explanation in order to illustrate the limitations of man’s knowledge in determining the true path towards perfection. This will consequently prove man’sneed for revelation.

a. The limitations of human sciences

In order for the realisation of the true path of felicity and perfection in all dimensions of life, it is necessary that the beginning and end of man, the connection he has with existence, his relationships with kin, aswell as the influences that any other form of relationship have upon him, must all be understood. It is also necessary to recognise and assess whether the effect is positive or negative.

Following that the responsibilities that millions of men have with the determination of their physiological and psychological conditions in a particular time, space and social circumstances must be known. However the establishment of these complex guidelines – with the understanding and formulating of all the dimensions and needsof man in order that there be no contradiction among them – cannot be particularised to one or several men, or even to numerous specialised groups within the field of humanities.

The trend of the alteration of rights and rules in the course of history manifests, that even after many experts throughout time have managed to constitute a sound and perfect system for rights encompassing all domains, the lawmakers of the world realise the limitations of their laws and continuously amend such rules and rights in order to perfect them.

It must not be forgotten that these laws and rules have utilised religious texts and Divine doctrines in their law making. It must not be overlooked that the attempts of the lawmakers and jurists are only to contribute towards the security for the social and worldly states, and they pay no heed towards the importance of the assurance for the Hereafter.

However, if attention had been paid to this important aspect (of the next world),then certainty within this field would never have been reached. It is possible that the issues dealing with the world and matter to a certain extent may be solved by experimental sciences, however the issues dealing with the Divine or next world could never be resolved with such sciences.

If we take a closer look at contemporary man made rules, we can see that compared to the knowledge held by man further back in history, contemporary manhas somewhat developed in his sense of living a proper life. However if this is with the assumption that contemporary man with the utilisation of thousands of years of experience was able to arrive upon a perfect and sound system of rights, and with the assumption that they encompass the realm of eternal and Divine felicity, the question remains as to how could the ignorance of so many men throughout the course of history be harmonious with Divine wisdom and the purpose of creation?

We can conclude that the purpose of creating man from start to finish can only be established if there exists the possibility to transcend sense (perception) and mind (intellect) in order to realise the realities of life and cognition of individual and group responsibilities. This very path, which transcends the intellect and sense perception, is no other than the way of revelation.

Through this argument it has also become clear, that the initial man would have to be a Prophet of God, so that he could guide man to the true and correct way of living, and establish the purpose of creation through the means of revelation.

The benefits of the nomination of prophets

The prophets of God in addition to the establishment of the true path of perfection for man (through Divine revelation) have also greatly influenced man regarding their perfection.

The most important ways they have had such an influence are mentioned below:

    1. There are many subjects that can be understood by the intellect, however this requires much past experience. Man due to the effects of false publicity or due to the influences of matter or animalistic tendencies tends to overlook or even forget the remarkableness of the intellect. This matter was brought to man’s attention by the prophets (as), who continually reminded man in order that he did not forget. It is because of this that the prophets (as) were named as reminders (mudhaker) and warners (natheer) and that the Qur’an has been referred to as the remembrance (dhikr), and reminder (thathkirah). Imam Ali (as) mentioned with regards to the wisdom of the nomination of a Prophet (as) that: “God the Supreme has sent prophets continuously in order that men remain faithful to their intrinsic nature, and are reminded of the forgotten bounties provided by God. This reminder is a propagation and declaration of the truth in order that the proof is completed upon them.”
    2. One of the most important and necessary elements of the development and perfection of man is the presence of a prototype (behavioral paradigm); this has already been proven in the field of psychology. The prophets of God (as) are the best trained and most perfect among men, and in addition to enlightening and educating people they also train and purify people. We are aware that purification and education have concurrently been mentioned throughout the Noble Qur’an and that sometimes purification should be regarded prior to education.
    3. Another great benefit of having the presence of prophets was that of political and sociological leadership. It is self-evident that an infallible leader is a great bounty from God for a society, and due to this a society will be protected from sociological corruption and deterioration and be able to move forward towards the perfection recognised by the leader.


Lesson Twenty-Four
Infallibility of the prophets (as)

The necessity of the immunity of revelation
• Other cases of infallibility
• Infallibility of the prophets (as)


The necessity of the immunity of revelation

After proving that there is a need for revelation as an alternative way to acquiring knowledge, and compensating for the deficiency of man’s senses and wisdom, another question arises:

If we recognise that ordinary people do not have any direct access to revelation, nor possess the capability of receiving it, and instead rely on specific people (prophets) as bearers of such news, what then guarantees the accuracy of such a message?

How can one be assured that the Prophet has received and transmitted the message to the people in a perfect manner?

And if there has been a mediator between the Prophet and the people, how can one be sure that that person has performed his duty accurately?

These questions have to be asked because revelation is only effective in dispelling man’s ignorance if it is immune from all intentional and/or unintentional alterations from the time of being issued to the time of being delivered to the people. If such a revelation contained intentional or unintentional alterations, the doubt about such a message would spread and people would lose confidence in it.

We therefore need to establish the means whereby one can conclude that the message received by the people is as it was relaid to the messenger.

When a people have no knowledge about revelation and its content is unknown to them, there is no way to control or observe the mediator’s accuracy in performing his duty. Any deficiency in the revelation would thus lie undetected, unless of course it stood against wisdom or reason. For example, if an individual claims that he has received a revelation from God stating the necessity or acceptability of two contradictory phenomena co-existing together, or if he claims that there is (may I seek God’s protection) plurality, combination, or decline in God’s nature, it is possible to use wisdom’s commandments (common sense) to falsify such statements.

However, the fundamental need for revelation comes in situations where the role of wisdom plays no part in their verification or falsification, and it is impossible to use the content of the message for its evaluation. In such cases, how can one verify the accuracy of the content of revelation and its immunity against the mediator’s intentional or unintentional alterations?

The answer to this is that man’s wisdom through heavenly wisdom (the theorem discussed in lesson 22) recognises that there must be other ways of understanding truths and practical duties. However, even if wisdom is not aware of how to realise such ways, it understands that the requisite for God’s wisdom is, that His messages reach the people intact otherwise, it will contradict His aim.

In other words, after recognising that God’s messages should reach people through one or more mediator/s and guide them towards their developmental freedom and fulfil God’s objectives for man’s creation, it will on the basis of God’s perfect qualities, be proved that such messages are in fact immune from intentional and unintentional alterations. Therefore, if He doesn’t intend His message to be delivered to His servants in the most accurate form, it will be against His wisdom and His wise will denies it. It will also contradict His endless knowledge if God does not know how and through whom to send His message to His servants to keep it intact. Furthermore, it will be against His infinite power if He cannot choose the deserving mediators and protect them against the attacks of Satan.

Therefore, since Almighty God is aware of everything, it is improbable to think that he has chosen a mediator while He has not been aware of his wrong doings (refer to S. An’am: 124). Moreover, according to His endless power it is improbable tosuppose that God has not been able to protect His revelation against Satan or any kind of unintentional alterations or forgetfulness (refer to S. Jinn: 26-28). Similarly, with reference to His wisdom, it is unacceptable to suggest that He has not intended to immunise His message against wrong doings (refer S.Anfal: 42). Thus, it is the requisite for God’s knowledge, power, and wisdom to deliver His message to His servants in the most accurate and perfect form. In this way the immunity of revelation is verified through the ‘Wisdom Theorem’.

Through this discussion, the immunity of the Angel or angels of revelation and also the immunity of the prophets in receiving revelation and their infallibility against intentional or unintentional alteration and forgetfulness in advertising God’s message is proved.

It also becomes clear as to why the Holy Qur’an emphasises the honesty of the Angel of revelation and in his power in protecting God’s message and repelling Satan’s attempts. The Qur’an also lays stress on the honesty of the prophets, and the protection of the message until its deliverance to the people. (Refer to S. Shura: 107,125, 143, 162, 178, 193, S. Takwir: 20-21, S. A’raf: 68, S. Jinn: 26-28, S. Dukhan: 18, S. Najm: 5, S. Al-Hijah: 44-47)

Other Cases of Infallibility

The infallibility proved by the above theorem for the angels and prophets (as) is limited to understanding and advertising revelation; however, there are other cases of infallibility, which cannot be approved by this theorem. They can be divided into three types, infallibility in:
a) Angels,
b) Prophets (as)
c) Other people such as the Holy Imams (as), the virgin Mary, and Fatima (as) By considering the infallibility of angels in cases other than that of understanding and advertising revelation, two points can be discussed: The first is the infallibility for the angels of revelation with relation to their duties other than revelation, and the other is related to the angels who are not in charge of revelation at all, for example the angels who are responsible for man’s daily food (Rizgh), recording deeds (ketabat-el- A’mal), …etc.

Moreover, with reference to the infallibility of the prophets in cases not related to their prophecy, two points can be mentioned: The first is the prophets infallibility against sin and rebellion (Ossyan), and the second is their infallibility against unintentional deeds or forgetfulness. The latter can be discussed in relation to infallibility in non-prophets aswell.

The problem of the infallibility of angels in relation to cases other than that of understanding and advertising revelation cannot be looked at through the ‘wisdom theorem’, unless the nature of the angels is first recognised. However, to discuss their nature is neither easy nor relevant to our discussion here; therefore, I refer the reader to the following two verses of the Holy Qur’an which express the infallibility of angels:


They do not precede Him in speech and only according to His commandment do they act.”
(The Holy Qur’an 21:27)


“They do not disobey Allah in what He commands them, and do as they are commanded”.
(The Holy Qur’an 66:7)

These two verses clearly state that the angels are gentle servants who carry out their duties under the supervision of their Lord and never disobey Him. However, the generality of the verses with respect to all the angels is debatable.

Nevertheless, to discuss infallibility found in people other than the prophets is more related to (the topic of) “Imamah”; therefore, in this part of my discussion I will focus on the infallibility of the prophets (as). Some of the points in this relation can only be treated by employing traditions and devotional reasons and should accordingly be discussed after proving the validity of the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah. I nonetheless, discussed the infallibility of the prophets here to follow the pattern of argumentation in this part of the book, (taking the validity of the Book and sunnah for granted) until it is proved in its due place.

Infallibility of the prophets (as)

Disagreement concerning the extent of the prophets’ infallibility arises between the different Islamic sects. The Twelve Imam- Shi’ites believe that the prophets (as) have innate infallibility and are immune from all types of mortal and venial sin.

They also hold the belief that it is impossible for the prophets (as) to sin even unintentionally or due to forgetfulness. However some of the other Islamic sects believe that the prophets (as) are immune only from mortal sin, and some believe this immunity from sin is attributed with the prophets (as) only from maturity to the end of their life, whereas the Shi’ites believe it is attributed to them at birth. Others also believe that the prophets (as) acquire this infallibility from the time of their appointment. It has also been said, that some branches of the Sunnites (Hashvieh and some literal followers of the Traditions) have totally denied the prophets (as) infallibility and believe that it is possible for the prophets (as) to commit sins, even intentionally, and even during their prophecy.

Before proving the infallibility of the prophets (as), it is necessary to discuss somepoints:

First, ‘the infallibility of the prophets’ does not merely mean the absence of commital of sin, because it is possible for an ordinary person not to commit sins during his life particularly if he/she has a short life. It rather means that the person should have an innate power, which protects him against committing sins even in the hardest situations. Such a power is the result of perfect and permanent awareness of the disgracefulness of sin and having a strong will to control his own manly desires. Since such an ability is only formed by God’s help, its functioning depends on Him. However, it is not correct to think that God forcefully protects a person against committing sin and as a result deprives his/her freedom. The infallibility of those who perform their heavenly responsibilities like the prophets (as), and Imams (as) has been said to be related to God in one more way, that is: God has guaranteed their immunity.

Secondly, the requisite for any person’s infallibility is that he/she should not commit any unlawful deeds like those, which are unlawful in all religions, or those which have been unlawful at the time of being committed in his own religion.

Committing an action, which is lawful for him in his own religion, cannot damage a Prophet’s infallibility. It cannot be damaged either by carrying out an action which has been unlawful in religions preceding his own or that will be claimed unlawful in succeeding religions.

Thirdly, the word ‘sin’ against which an innocent person is immune, means an unlawful action according to religious jurisprudence; it also includes the refusal of doing an ‘obligation’ (Wajib) action. However, the term ‘sin’ and its equivalentwords like ‘wrong doing’ (Thanb) and ‘rebellion’ (Ossyan) have a wider application including ‘failure to do the best thing’ (Tark-el-ula). Nevertheless, committing the latter is not in contradiction with infallibility.


Lesson Twenty-Five
Reasons for the infallibility of prophets (as)

Introduction
Intellectual reasons for the infallibility of prophets (as)
Traditional reasons for the infallibility of prophets (as)
The mystery of the infallibility of prophets (as)

Introduction

The belief in the immunity of the prophets (as) against sin, whether intentional or unintentional is one of the important and categorical beliefs in Shi’ism. The great Imams (as) have verified this fact to their followers and used different discourses to deal with the relevant challenges raised by its opponents. One of the most popular arguments in this relation is that of Imam Ridha (as), and has been recorded in the books of tradition and history.

However, to deny the forgetfulness of the prophet (as) with reference to the lawful and everyday aspects of their lives has been more or less a matter of debate, and the sayings from the Prophet’s Household (as) are not free from discrepancy.

Nevertheless, research on such sayings needs further explanation, although such a belief is by no means fundamental.

Moreover, there are other reasons for the infallibility of the prophets (as), which can be divided into two groups: Intellectual and traditional (Qur’anic). Although traditional reasons are more trustworthy, two intellectual and some traditional reasons for the infallibility of the prophets (as) will be discussed in this chapter.

Intellectual reasons for the infallibility of prophets (as)

The first intellectual reason for the necessity of the prophets’ immunity against committing sin, is that the main objective for their mission is to guide man towards the truth and teach him how to perform the duties God has assigned to him.Moreover, the prophets (as) are in fact the representatives of God among men and must guide them towards the right path (As-sirat al-mustaqeem). However, if such representatives and missionaries do not obey the Divine instructions themselves and their behaviour contradicts their mission, people will find the contrast between their words and behaviour contradictory and, therefore, the objective of their mission will not be thoroughly fulfilled. Thus, God’s wisdom and kindness necessitates that the prophets (as) be pure and innocent, and for them to refrain from committing any undeserving action even if unintentional or due to forgetfulness. The people will thus never accept unwillingness or forgetfulness as an excuse for the prophets (as) to commit a sin.

The second intellectual reason for such infallibility is that, rather than advertising the content of revelation and their mission to the people, the prophets (as) are responsible for educating and purifying and helping the most talented of people reach the highest level of man’s perfection. In other words, rather than teaching (Ta’leem) and showing the people the right way, the prophets (as) are responsible for educating (Tarbiyah) and leading them. Such an education is valuable and solely applies to the most talented and outstanding members of the society. To educate such people needs the most deserving educators who are themselves at the topmost level of man’s perfection and have the most perfect form of faculty (Malakah) – the faculty of Infallibility (Malakat-al-esmah).

In addition, the educator’s behaviour in educating others is generally more important than his words; therefore, if a person has deficiencies in his behaviour, his words will not affect the people in a desirable way. Hence, God’s objective for sending prophets (as) as the educators of people will not be thoroughly fulfilled unless they are immune against any kind of deviations in their words and behaviour.

Traditional reasons for the infallibility of prophets (as)

1. The Holy Qur’an has described a group of people as being, “purified for the sake of God” (Mukhlas), (the word Mukhlas is different from Mokhles. The former refers to a person who has been purified by God, and the latter is a person who is pure in performing his worship). Satan does not intend to mislead this group of people, who are exempted from his oath to mislead the children of Adam (as):


“(Iblis) said: “Then, by Thy Power, I will put them all in the wrong- Except Thyservants amongst them, sincere and purified (by Thy grace).”( 38:82-3).

There is no doubt that Satan’s refusal to mislead them is due to their immunity against being misled or corrupted; otherwise his enmity would include them and he would do whatever was in his power to seduce them.

Thus, the term used to describe being purified for the sake of God is synonymous with being infallible (Ma’sum). Although there is no evidence for the allocation of infallibility being given to the prophets (as), it is certainly one of their qualities. The Holy Qur’an refers to some of the prophets (as) as being purified for the sake of God (Mukhlaseen). For instance:


“And remember Our servants Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, possessors of Power and Vision. Surely We purified them by a pure quality, the keeping in mind of the final abode.” ( 38: 45-6).

And also:


“And mention in the Book (the story of) Moses: Surely he was one purified, and he was an apostle, a prophet”. ( 19: 51).

The Holy Qur’an also asserts that the reason behind the immunity of Prophet Yussuf (as), who was severely tempted with the committal of sin, was that he was a purified person.

“..thus (it was) that We might turn away from him evil and indecency, surely he was one of Our sincere servants.” ( 12: 24)

2. The Holy Qur’an claims that unconditional obedience to the prophets (as) is obligatory.

“And We did not send any apostle but that he should be obeyed by Allah’s permission.”( 4:64).

However, unconditional obedience to the prophets (as) is acceptable provided that it is in line with the obedience of God and has no contradiction in obeying Him. Otherwise, the commands from God with relation to unconditional obedience to Him and unconditional obedience to those who are subject to sin and deviation would be in opposition.

3. The Holy Qur’an has allocated Divine responsibilities to those who are not involved in ‘cruelty’. In response to Ibrahim (as), who asked for the position of ‘Imam’ for his children, the Holy Qur’an asserts:


“My covenant does not include the unjust” ( 2: 124).

We know that the committal of sin is an oppression towards oneself (nafs), and that the Qur’an terms a guilty person as an oppressor, therefore the prophets (as) who hold the position of the Divine responsibilities of prophecy and prophetic mission must be free from any kind of sin or cruelty.

Numerous Qur’anic verses and traditions can be employed to discuss the infallibility of the prophets (as); however we will conclude the discussion at this point.

The philosophy behind the infallibility of prophets (as)

At the end of this lesson, it is worth discussing the mystery behind the infallibility of the prophets (as). The mystery of their infallibility in receiving revelation is that their understanding of revelation is basically free from any mistakes, and one who has the merit of receiving it will find revelation a scientific reality, which he thoroughly comprehends. He will also recognise the relationship between the revelation and its issuer—whether or not there is an Angel in between, in this relation the Holy Qur’an states:


“The heart was not untrue in (making him see) what he saw”
( 53:11).

Furthermore, it is impossible for the receiver of revelation to hesitate as to whether or not he has received it, over who has sent the revelation to him, or as to what its content is. Therefore, if in some man-made stories there are cases where a Prophet is doubtful about his prophecy, fails in understanding the content of the revelation or does not recognise its issuer, they should not be given ant credence.

Such cases are like saying that one is doubtful over one’s existence, presence, or conscience.

To discuss the mystery behind the infallibility of the prophets (as) in performing their Divine responsibilities, such as proclaiming God’s message needs an introduction, which comes below:

Man performs his favourite actions through a feeling of desire, which forms within him towards a subject; the desire is then activated by various factors.

Moreover, by having access to various sciences and a variety of senses, he recognises the way to his objective and practices whatever he thinks will help him reach it. At the same time, when there are contradictory and intervening desires, he attempts to recognise and choose the best and most deserving one. Nevertheless, due to man’s lack of knowledge, he may commit a mistake in his evaluation and/or recognition,or due to ignorance and/or his association with an inferior desire, he might miscalculate the better choice. In such a case there may be no further opportunity to re-think and recognise the best choice.

Therefore, the better a person is at recognising the truth, the higher and more everlasting the attention he pays to his choices will be; and the higher the intention for harnessing his innate desires and excitements, the more remarkable the success he experiences in choosing the best will be. This will in turn secure him from deviation and wrong -doing.

This is the way the talented people, by acquiring the necessary knowledge and insight and by utilising their proper education, go through the different stages of perfection, so that they can touch the borders of infallibility. When they reach such an exalted position, then such people do not even think of committing sin or wrong doing; this is in the same way that a wise person would never think of taking a poisonous or fatal drug or consume unclean or rotten substances.

If we assume that a person’s ability for recognising the truth, and the purity of his soul is at the highest level, as described in the Holy Qur’an like the pure, clean and flammable olive oil, which is ready to blaze even without a spark.

(The Holy Qur’an 24:35 )

And if we further assume that such a person due to the same characteristics receives Divine education, confirmed by the Holy Spirit, he will (surely) go through the stages of perfection at the utmost speed and fulfil the long distance towards perfection in a short duration of time. To such a person the disgracefulness of sin, is as recognisable as the dangers of poisonous and rotten substances are to an ordinary man. Just as ordinary people are not forced to avoid drinking and eating poison, an infallible person is also not forced to avoid sin.

Lesson Twenty-Six
Responses to Some Doubts

• Why does an infallible person (Ma’sum) deserve reward?
• Why did the infallible Prophets and Imams confess to committing sins?
• How is Satan’s influence on the prophets (as) in agreement with their infallibility?
• Attributing rebellion and forgetfulness to Adam (as)
• Attributing lies to some of the prophets (as)
• Moses’ (as) murdering a Ghebti
• Prohibiting the Prophet (saws) from casting doubt on his Mission

Introduction

Some doubts have been put forward with relation to the infallibility of the prophets (as); the following introduces those doubts and presents their relevant responses:

Why does an infallible person deserve reward?

If Almighty God has immunised the prophets (as) against committing sins and if the performance of their duties is guaranteed, they would therefore have no freedom in their choice, and as a result they would not deserve any reward for performing their duties properly or for avoiding sins. In other words, any other person who was provided by God with infallibility would behave similarly.

The response to the above doubt has been given in my previous discussions; however to summarise; having infallibility does not mean being obliged to perform duties or avoid sins. Just because the prophets (as) know that God has provided them with infallibility and that He is their protector, does not mean that they have no choice over the optional aspects of their lives. As discussed in previous lessons, although God’s will dominates the occurrence of all events, it does not intervene or repel man’s will, but rather parallels it. However, when God’s attention towards man accommodates a specific achievement, connecting it to God (saying that ‘God did it’), it is nothing more than man’s double concern about Him.

Nevertheless, God’s attention towards the innocent, like providing particular people with specific means, conditions, and facilities, makes their responsibilities heavier. Therefore, as they might receive more reward for their obedience, they may also receive more punishment for their disobedience. Thus, their reward and punishment will balance although the innocent person, by his proper choice, will not be entitled to punishment. The same analogy can be used for all others who enjoy a particular merit, for example, scholars and members of the Prophet’s family (refer S. Ahzab 30-33) regarding the Prophet’s wives. Those who have higher or more essential responsibilities will similarly receive higher reward for their good deeds, just as they will receive more severe punishments for their sins (provided that they commit sins). This is why those in charge of higher spiritual positions face a greater danger of decline and are more afraid of becoming deviated.

Why did the infallible Prophets and Imams (as) confess to committing sins?

According to the prayers from the prophets (as) and other innocent people, they consider themselves guilty and ask God to forgive them for their sins. In such circumstances and with these confessions how can they be considered as infallible?

The answer is that the innocent were at the highest level of perfection and were in a close relationship with God; therefore, they considered their duties much more beyond those of other (ordinary) people. For them, paying attention to anything except God was considered to be a great sin; this is why they apologised, and asked for God’s forgiveness. However, as I previously mentioned, infallibility in the prophets (as) does not only mean immunity against anything, which can be called sin; rather it is also against opposing the essential duties and committing what is religiously forbidden.

How is Satan’s influence on the prophets (as) in agreement with their infallibility?

One of the arguments, with relation to the prophets’ (as) infallibility, asserts thatthe prophets (as) are completely pure and that Satan cannot affect them. However, the Holy Qur’an itself mentions some instances in which Satan has affected the prophets, for example:

One of Qur’anic verses claims:


“ O children of Adam! Let not the Shaitan cause you to fall into affliction as he expelledyour parents from the garden”. Chapter (Surah) (A’raaf) : 27

In this verse, Adam and Eve’s (as) deception and expulsion from Paradise have been attributed to Satan. Moreover the Qur’an asserts:

In another verse when quoting Ayyub (AS):


“And remember Our servant Ayyub, when he called upon his Lord: This Shaitan has afflicted me with toil and torment”. (Saad): 41

Similarly, in the following verse a kind of satanic inspiration to all prophets has been approved:


“And We did not send before you any apostle or prophet, but when he desired, the Shaitan made a suggestion respecting his desire”. Hajj: 52

The response is that in none of these verses, does the penetration attributed to Satan cause the prophets (as) to oppose their essential duties. However the first quoted verse -i.e. (A’raaf) :27- points to the satanic temptation (concerning Adam and Eve) for eating from the forbidden tree, which was not lawful. In fact God had just reminded Adam and Eve (as) not to eat from that tree; otherwise, they would be expelled from that garden and cast down to the Earth. Nevertheless, the satanic temptation caused them to oppose that ‘guiding prohibition’. Moreover, the previous world (in which Adam and Eve (as) lived) was not a world of responsibilities, because there were no religions sent by God. In addition, the second quoted verse –i.e. (Saad) :41- points to the sufferings and problems made by Satan with relation to the Prophet Ayyub (as), and does not indicate any opposition on behalf of that great man towards God’s orders and prohibitions.

Furthermore, the third quoted verse –i.e. (Hajj) :52- refers to the disturbances Satan made for all the prophets (as), and the problems he made in the way of the fulfilment of their duties with relation to guiding people. However, Almighty God will eventually destroy Satan’s tricks and strengthen His True religion.

Attributing forgetfulness and rebelliousness to Adam (as)

In chapter: ‘TaHa’ verses: 112 and 115 of the Holy Qur’an, rebellion and forgetfulness have both been attributed to the Prophet Adam (as). How are these characteristics in agreement with infallibility? The answer to this question can be understood from our previous discussions, which explain that ‘rebellion’ and ‘forgetfulness’ have not been in relation to Adam’s essential responsibilities.

Attributing lies to some of the prophets (as)

In the holy Qur’an, some prophets (as) have been introduced as telling lies, forexample Ibrahim (as) is quoted as saying the following, whilst he was not sick:


“So he said I am sick. ” 37:89

Ibrahim (as) was also quoted as saying the following, when he himself had destroyed the idols:


“He said: Surely (some doer) has done it; the chief of them is this.” 21:63

Also in Chapter Yusuf (as) it states:

Then a crier cried out: O caravan! You are most surely thieves.” 12:70

While Yusuf’s brothers had not stolen anything. The response to this is, that such sentences, according to some narrations (Ravayat) are saying one thing and meaning something else (Touriyah), and have been expressed for the sake of something more important. It can be concluded from some verses that they were preceded by an inspiration from God. For instance, in Yusuf’s (as) story, the Holy Qur’an states :

“Thus did We plan for the sake of Yussuf”.

Therefore, such lies are not in contrast with infallibility.

Moses’ (as) murdering of a Ghebti

In the story of Moses (as), we are told that he killed a Ghebti person, who was quarrelling with a member of the Bani-Israel, and then he fled from Egypt. When Moses (as) was ordered to invite Pharaoh and his followers towards God, he (Moses) said:


And they have a charge of crime against me therefore I fear they may slay me.” 26 : 14

When Pharaoh reminded him of the murder he had committed, Moses said:

“He said: I did it then while I was of those unable to see the right course.” 26 : 20

How can this story agree with the immunity of the prophets (as) from error even before their mission?

The answer is that first of all the murder of that Ghebti person was not on purpose; Moses (as) struck him once and he was killed. Secondly, the sentence “And they have a charge of crime against me” is in fact from the point of view from Pharaoh and his followers, meaning that Moses (as) thought that they would call him guilty; he was therefore afraid of being executed because of that murder. Thirdly, the sentence “And I was of those unable to see the right course” is either to pretend to be in agreement with Pharaoh and his followers, meaning ‘assuming that I was misled at that time, God has guided me and sent me to you with absolute miracles’, or to go astray (Dhalaal) might mean that he (Moses) was unaware of the result of that strike.

However it by no means indicates any opposition from Moses (as) against his essential Heavenly duties.

Prohibiting the Prophet (saws) from casting doubt on his mission

In many verses God prohibits the Prophet (saws) from being in doubt:


“But if you are in doubt as to what We have revealed to you, ask those who read the Bookbefore you; certainly the truth has come to you you’re your Lord, therefore you should not be of the disputers.” 10:94

Other examples can be found in: Baqarah: 142, Al-e-Imraan: 60, An’am: 114, Huud: 17 and Sajdah: 23.

How is it possible to say that understanding revelation is free from doubts and hesitations?

The answer is that these verses do not indicate the Prophet’s (saws) hesitation at all, rather they are claiming that the Prophet’s mission, the Holy Qur’an and the legitimacy of its content leave no space for doubt and hesitation. Such an addressingis in fact the same as “making a hint towards someone indirectly”.

The Prophet (saws) is described in the Qur’an as committing some sins ?

In the Holy Qur’an, the Prophet (saws) has been said to have committed some sins, which have been forgiven by God. The Holy Qur’an states that:


“That Allah may forgive you your sins of the past and the future”. 48:1

The response is that the word sin (Dhanb) in the above verse refers to the accusations the dualists made against the Prophet (saws) in response to his insulting their idols. Forgiving them means repelling the possible resulting effects of such accusations. The reason for this interpretation is that the conquest of Mecca has been considered to be the cause of forgiving them:

Verily, We have given you (O Muhammad) a manifest victory. That Allah may forgive you your sins of the past and the future”.

Clearly, if they were the type of usual sins, then their forgiveness, because of conquering Mecca, could not be justified.

Reports concerning the marriage of the Prophet (saws) with the divorced wife of Zaid

The Holy Qur’an, in the story of the Prophet’s marriage with the divorced wife of Zaid (his adopted son), asserts that:


You did fear the people, whereas Allah had the better right that you should fear Him.” 33:37

How is this in agreement with his infallibility?

The answer is that the Prophet (saws) was afraid that the people would think of him as someone who acts according to his personal desires and of being labelled as an apostate. What he did was on the basis of God’s commandment, with relation to violating one of the wrong customs of the ignorant era before Islam. In this verse, God the Almighty tells His Prophet (saws) that this violation is more important (than what people would think about him), and that being afraid of opposing God’s will and the practical struggle against that wrong custom, was more deserving Therefore, the above verse is by no means blaming the Prophet (saws).

The rapprochement of the Prophet (saws) in the Holy Qur’an

The Holy Qur’an in some cases has reproached the Prophet (saws). For instance, with relation to permitting those who did not want to participate in war, the Holy Qur’an claims:

“Allah pardon you! Why did you give them leave.” 9:43

With reference to the Prophet (saws) prohibiting himself from doing some lawful things for the satisfaction of some of his wives, the Holy Qur’an asserts:


“O Prophet! Why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; You seek to please your wives.” 66:1

How are such reproaches in agreement with his infallibility?

The answer is, that such sentences are in fact “praises in the form of reproaches,” indicating the Prophet’s (saws) kindness and sympathy, which never disappointed even the hypocrites and never disclosed their secrets. He considered his wives’ satisfaction prior to his own wishes, so he swore to forbid himself from some thing lawful. The verse therefore, by no means refers to changing God’s order or making a lawful thing unlawful for the people.

Such verses are in fact from one angle, similar to those in which the Prophet’s attempts and sympathy in guiding the unbelievers have been reported, such as:


“Perhaps you will kill yourself with grief because they do not believe.” 26’: 3

Or they are like the verses which indicate the huge amount of suffering he tolerated for worshipping God:


“TaHa. We have not sent down unto you to cause you distress.” 20: 1

Such verses are therefore by no means in contradiction with the Prophet’s (saws) infallibility.


Lesson Twenty-Seven
Miracles

• Ways of proving prophecy
• Definition of a miracle
• Extraordinary acts
• Divine extraordinary acts
• Characteristics of the prophets’ (as) miracles


Ways of proving prophecy

The third fundamental point in the section about prophecy is to establish how the honesty of the true prophets (as) and the dishonesty of the false prophets are verified.

If a person is a wrong doer, or commits sins whose disgracefulness can be distinguished by wisdom, he cannot then be trusted, and his honesty can be falsified by referring to the requisites of the prophets’ chastity. Such false claims can also be rejected if they are against wisdom or man’s intrinsic nature, or if there are contradictions in them.

Nevertheless, it is possible that a persons clean record of life maybe so, that impartial people trust his claim, especially if his claims are in agreement with wisdom. Moreover, it is also possible that a person’s prophecy maybe approved through the predictions made by previous prophets. In such cases those who search for the truth will have no doubt in accepting him as a Prophet.

However, if the people are left with no trustworthy indications, and there have been no predictions or approvals by previous prophets, there would be a need for additional proof before first accepting a person as a legitimate Prophet. Almighty God on the basis of His absolute wisdom, has provided the evidence by giving His prophets (as) the miracles, which are signs to their true claims. God refers to these as ‘evidences’ (Ayah). The term ‘evidence,’ has other implications as well; for instance it may refer to God’s Knowledge, Power, and Wisdom presented in all the usual and unusual aspects of creation.

To summarise, the veracity of the claims of the prophets can be verified in three ways:

    1. Through reliable signs, such as honesty and truth, and by having no deviation from the path of God and justice during their life. However, this way of distinguishing the prophets (as) is applicable to those whohave lived among people for several years and their way of life is known to the society. Whereas if for example, a Prophet is appointed by God in his early youth or the people know very little about his personality or way of life, such clues cannot be helpful in recognising the person’s honesty in his claim
    2. Through introduction by the previous or contemporary prophets. This is relevant to the people who have distinguished the previous Prophet and are aware of his prediction. This however is obviously not applicable to the first Prophet.
    3. Through miracles, which can have a wider and more popular application. I will explain this third way in the following sections:

The definition of a miracle

A miracle is an extraordinary act, which is performed by a person who claims tobe a Prophet. It is rooted in God’s will and used as a clue to the Prophet’s true claim.
The above definition comprises of three points:
a) There are some extraordinary events, which do not emerge from usual, or common causes.
b) Some of these extraordinary acts are performed by the prophets (as) and are rooted in God’s will.
c) Such extraordinary acts can be the evidence for the honesty of the prophets’ claims, and can therefore be termed as miracles.


The following provides an explanation for each of the three points in the definition:

Extraordinary Events

The events of this world emerge from causes, which can be recognised through various experiments: for example all the events, which take place in physics, chemistry, biology, and psychology. However, there occur some rare situations where such events happen in a different way, so that their causes cannot be distinguished experimentally. For instance the amazing acts of the Yogis have been recognised by the specialists of various sciences, as not following the rules of empirical or material sciences. Such acts are called ‘extraordinary’!

Divine extraordinary Acts

Extraordinary acts can be divided into two general groups:

One group includes acts, which have no usual cause, but are at the same time accessible to man through education, or rehearsal similar to the practice of the Yogis. Another group of extraordinary acts happen specifically by God’s permission.

Those who have a special relationship with God can only perform such acts.

Therefore, such acts have two fundamental characteristics: First, they cannot be taught or learnt, and secondly, they cannot be affected by another stronger power, nor can they be defeated by it. Such extraordinary acts are dedicated to the selected servants of God, and will never be exposed to the misled. At the same time, they are not specific to the prophets (as), as occasionally other great saints (Awliya’) have had access to them. But it should be noted however, that not all such extraordinary acts are termed as miracles. The extraordinary acts committed by the non-prophets are called saint-miracles (Karaamat). This is just as unusual heavenly knowledge is not merely transferred to man by the revelation presented to the prophets (as), but can also be provided to others (non-prophets) by inspiration (Ilhaam, Tahdith, etc.).

In the above discussion, the ways of distinguishing between the two types of extraordinary acts (Divine and Non-divine) were explained. It was also discussed that if the performance of an extraordinary act can be taught or learnt, or if another factor can avoid or provide a barrier to it or eliminate its effect, it will not then be classified as a ‘divine’ extraordinary act.

A person’s corruption of belief or personal behaviour could also point to the lack of relationship he has with Almighty God, and indicate that his actions are rooted in satanic temptations and manly desires. It seems reasonable at this point to state that the only performer of extraordinary acts is Almighty God, insofar that such acts need His permission to happen (It refers to Surah Lightening (Ra’d): 37, Ghaafer: 78) (Thisis in addition to the necessity of His permission for all creation including usual events.). Such extraordinary acts can also be attributed to those who function as mediators like the angels or prophets (as). As it is stated in the Holy Qur’an; giving life to the dead, curing diseases, and creating birds have been attributed to Isa (as). (Refers to Surah Al-e-Emraan: 49, Ma’edeh: 110)

There is, therefore, no contradiction between the two attributions—God’s or His servants—as God’s performance of the actions parallels that of His servants.

Characteristics of the miracles of the prophets’ (as)

The third point discussed in the aforementioned definition, is that ‘miracles’ are the clues to the honesty of the prophets (as). Therefore, rather than being permitted by God, such extraordinary acts should be employed as clues to the prophecy of the Prophet. At the same time, and with a little generalisation, they should also include acts, which are performed to provide evidence for the honesty of Imams (as).

The term ‘Generosity’ refers to all of the divine extraordinary acts performed by non-prophets, and is against the extraordinary acts, which are rooted in manly or satanic desires, such as magic, divination, or what the Yogis practice, which can be taught and learnt or defeated by other stronger powers. It is also possible to determine the unholy nature of such acts by referring to the corruption of beliefs or behaviour of those who perform them.

It seems necessary to maintain here that the miracles of the prophets directly prove their honesty in their claim of prophecy. However, the accuracy of the content of their message and the necessity of obeying their commands is proven indirectly.

In other words, the approval of the prophecy of the prophets (as) is through intellectual reasoning, whilst the validity of the content of their messages is through devotional ones (Refer to lessons 4 and 21 of this book).


Lesson Twenty-Eight
Responses to Some Doubts

• Do miracles contradict causality?
• Do extraordinary acts indicate changes in Divine customs?
• Why did the Prophet of Islam (saws) refuse to present miracles to the public?
• Can miracles be considered as intellectual or convincing evidence?

With respect to ‘Miracles’, some doubts have been raised. The following presents the doubts and their relevant explanations:

Do miracles contradict causality?

Every physical phenomenon has a specific cause, which can be recognized through experimentation. However, if due to the deficiencies of laboratory equipment the cause of a phenomenon is not recognised, it cannot be considered as evidence for rejecting causality. Therefore, extraordinary acts can be justified, by saying that their causes have not yet been recognised and that the only extraordinary thing about them, is that while being unknown to ordinary people, their causes have been discovered by their performers. Thus, denying experimentally recognisable causes is contradictory to the principle of causality and is unacceptable.

The response to this doubt is, that the principle of causality is nothing more than the proof, that any dependent or resulting phenomenon has a cause; however, the realisation of that cause through scientific experiments is by no means a requisite for such a principle and there is no reason why it should be so. The reason is that the scope of scientific experimentation is limited to natural phenomena, and it is impossible to prove the existence or non-existence of metaphysical phenomena or their effects through laboratory tests.

Moreover, it is incorrect to interpret miracles in terms of being aware of the unknown causes, because if this awareness is gained through the usual factors, there would be no difference between an extraordinary phenomenon and other usual phenomena, and it could not be considered extraordinary. However, if such awareness is reached unusually, the act will be extraordinary, and should it be in accordance with God’s specific permission and the evidence of true prophecy, it would be considered as a miracle (scientific miracle). In this way Isa’s (as) knowledge about people’s food and property is known as one of his miracles. (Ale Imran: 49)

Miracles are not only limited to the scientific; there are other types as well, which cannot be denied. Finally, the question remains as to what the difference is between miracles and other types of extraordinary acts with reference to the principle of causality?

Do extraordinary acts indicate changes in Divine customs?

Divine custom has dictated that every phenomenon follows a specific cause and according to the verses of the Holy Qur’an, there will be no change in this way (Refer to: Isra: 77, Ahzab: 62, Fatir: 43, Fateh: 23). Therefore, extraordinary acts, which are the proof for such changes in these customs are rejected by these verses.

This doubt is like the previous one; the difference is that in the former, the intellect was used for reasoning and in the latter the verses of the Holy Qur’an. The response is that it is not reasonable to limit unchangeable Divine customs to merely include usual causes for all phenomena. It is like saying that there is an unchangeable Divine law and that fire is the only cause for heat! Such claims can be challenged by saying that different causes for various phenomena, and the replacement of the usual causes by unusual ones, have always existed in the world and should consequently be described as a Divine custom. Therefore, restricting the causes of events to usual ones is considered a change in Divine customs and those verses of the Holy Qur’an are (in fact) denying it. Thus, interpreting the verses, which deny changes in Divine customs in a way that they show the replacement of usual causes by unusual ones is impossible and it is unreasonable to describe that interpretation as a Divine custom. Moreover, the great number of verses, which indicate the occurrence of miracles and extraordinary acts, can be strong reasons for falsifying such an interpretation. The correct interpretation for such verses should be searched for in the books of commentary; however, I will briefly explain that such Holy verses deny the independence of the events from their causes, rather than the plurality of causes or the replacement of a usual cause by an unusual one. It is nonetheless; probably right to claim that the majority of such verses are related to the effect of unusual causes.

Why did the Prophet of Islam (saws) refuse to present miracles to the public?

It is stated in the Holy Qur’an that people frequently asked the Prophet (saws) to present to them some miracles, but he refused. (Refer to: An’am: 37, 109, Yunus: 20, Ra’d: 7, Anbiya: 5) If providing miracles is a way of proving prophecy, why did the Prophet (saws) not use this means?

The response is, that such verses are related to the requests after the Prophet (saws) had proved his prophecy in three ways: clues to his honesty, predictions made by the previous prophets (as), and miracles. Such requests were rooted in obstinacy and enmity and were due to reasons other than finding the truth (Refer to: An’am:35, 124, TaHa: 33, Saffatt: 14, Qamar: 2, Sha’ara: 3, 4, 197, Isra: 59, Rum: 58).

Therefore, God’s Wisdom didn’t necessitate responding to them.

To provide further explanation, it should be stated that the reason for presenting miracles, which have been exceptional to the rules governing the universe, have sometimes provided responses to the people’s requests (e.g., Saleh’s (as) camel), and were at other times incidental (e.g., Jesus’ (as) miracles), were to introduce God’s prophets (as) and provide the people with the means for such an introduction.

However, miracles were not employed to force the people to accept the prophets’ invitations, neither were they used for people to compulsory submit to them.

Furthermore, miracles were not a means to entertain the people by violating the rules of causality for usual events. Such an objective does not necessitate responding to all the requests. In some cases responding to certain requests would be unwise and contradict the ultimate aim of the miracle. For example, there were requests, which would restrict the people’s choices and enforce them to accept the prophets’ (as) invitations, or cases where the requests were due to enmity and obstinacy.

Moreover, if all the requests received a positive response, triteness would occur and people would see miracles as entertainment, and they would gather around the Prophet (saws) for their personal benefit. In addition, testing people for their faith and providing them with the freedom in decision making would be impossible and they would accept the obedience of the Prophets (as) aversely or forcefully. In both cases such an acceptance would be against both wisdom and the real aims of the miracle. However, in other cases where Divine wisdom necessitated, the Prophet (saws) would accept such requests. There are many miracles, which have been attributed to the Prophet of Islam (saws); and most have been verified through successive traditions, however his ultimate miracle is the eternal miracle of the Holy Qur’an. More explanation will be provided about the Holy Qur’an in its due place.

Can miracles be accepted as intellectual or convincing evidence?

Since miracles are performed according to God’s specific permission, they can indicate a particular relationship between Almighty God and the performer of the miracle, who has been provided with such permission. In other words, God has fulfilled His own Will through the performer of the miracle. However, the intellectual requisite for such a relationship is not the existence of another relationship – the type of sending and receiving of revelation—between Almighty God and the performer of the miracle. Therefore, miracles cannot be considered as intellectual evidence for the honesty of the prophets (as) in their claims. However,they can in the best condition, be considered as speculative or convincing evidence. The response is, that extraordinary acts – even Divine ones – are not by themselves the evidence for a relationship to revelation and, due to the same reason, the generosity of God’s saints cannot be considered as the proof for their prophecy.

However, the subject of our discussion is a person who has claimed to be the Prophet of God, by using miracles as the proof for his honesty. If such a person had falsely claimed to be a Prophet, and thereby committed one of the greatest and most disgraceful sins causing the most evil corruption of this world and the Hereafter, – he would never deserve such a relationship with Almighty God, and Divine wisdom would never provide him with the miracles to deceive His servants.

In conclusion, our intellect clearly realises that having a specific relationship with Almighty God and being equipped with the ability to perform miracles, is only deserved by those who do not betray their Lord and do not mislead His servants to eternal misfortune.

Therefore, miracles can be considered intellectual evidence for the true claim of prophecy.


Lesson Twenty-Nine
Characteristics of the prophets (as)

• The plurality of the prophets
• The number of the prophets
• Prophets and messengers
• Prominent prophets
• Some points


The plurality of the prophets

So far, three fundamental issues related to prophecy and the recognition of leaders have been discussed. Moreover, it was realised that due to the deficiencies of human wisdom in acquiring the information necessary for the welfare of this worldand the hereafter, it is necessary for Divine wisdom to select a Prophet or prophets to teach them the necessary facts. These prophets will in turn, present those facts to others in the most perfect and intact form. Furthermore, it is necessary (for Divine wisdom) to introduce the prophets to the public so that no excuse remains (for the unbelievers). The most general way to accomplish this is the presentation of miracles.

I used intellectual evidence to prove the above point; however, such pieces of evidence do not deal with the necessity of the plurality of the prophets (as), their Books or Divine religions. Therefore, if for instance the conditions of man’s life were so, that one Prophet could cater for all of humanity’s needs up until the end of time, and every individual or group of people throughout history could findhis/their responsibilities, by referring to what the same Prophet had proposed, no contradiction would then evolve with the requisites of those pieces of (intellectual) evidence.

However, first we know that every human being, including the prophets, have a limited life and Divine wisdom has not found it necessary to keep the first Prophet alive for all time. Secondly, the condition of people’s lives in different places and at different times are not the same; such differences and specifically the gradual complications of social relationships can influence the quality aswell as the quantity of social rules and regulations. Furthermore, in some cases new regulations should be issued and if such regulations are advertised by a Prophet who had been appointed thousands of years ago, it would make no sense; similarly, the protection of those regulations and handling of them with specific cases would be very difficult.

Thirdly, in ancient times, it was not possible to advertise the invitations of the prophets (as), and for the entire world to be informed of their message would be impossible.

Fourthly, with the process of time, and due to various factors, the instructions given by a Prophet to the people of his time would face alterations (to familiarise with such alterations refer to: ‘Alhoda ilaa din al Mostafa’, by Allamah Shaikh Muhammad Javaad Balaaghi) and incorrect interpretations, so that after some time the original religion would change into a deviated one. The same thing has happened to the monotheistic religion presented by Isa (as), which later changed into the concept of the trinity.

The above discussion makes the reason for the plurality of prophets and the differences in some devotional and social instructions of the Divine religions clear (Refer to Surahs Maidah: 48, Hadj: 67). This is in line with the fact that all Divine religions are not only the same in their principles of belief and ethical foundations, but they have also been in agreement with reference to their personal and social instructions (Refer to: Baqarah 131-7, 285, Ale Imraan: 19-20). For example, Prayers (Salaat) have existed in all religions, although the way to perform them and the direction towards which they were performed (Qiblah) have been different. There has also been poor-rate (Zakaat) in all religions; however, its amount and the cases for which it would be necessary have not been the same.

Therefore, it is a necessity to believe in all of the prophets (as) and to admit their prophecy without any discrimination, aswell as accepting their messages and information provided by them, and recognising them as being unique individuals (Refer to: Shura: 13, Nisa: 136, 152, Ale Imraan: 84-5). Moreover, it is not permissible to deny any of the prophets (as) or any of their instructions, because denying one Prophet is tantamount to the denial of all the instructions issued by God (Refer to: Nisa: 150, Baqarah: 85). However, the practical duties of every Prophet’s nation at any time are to obey the instructions provided by the same Prophet and at the same time.

It is worth mentioning that although human intellect due to the aforementioned points realises the rational behind the plurality of the prophets and the differences between Divine religions, it cannot discover the exact formula for the number of prophets and Divine religions, and cannot decide when and where a new Prophet would be appointed and a new religion introduced. It is however, understood from the above points that while the conditions of man’s life are so, that the Prophet’s invitation can reach all the people of the world and his message can be protected and secured for future generations, as long as the social regulations do not need fundamental changes, no new Prophet would be necessary.

The number of prophets

As I discussed above, our intellect cannot decide about the number of prophets and Divine Books; such points can only be proved through traditions. Even in the case of the Holy Qur’an, although it emphasises that Almighty God has sent a Prophet for every nation (Refer to Surah Fatir: 24, Nahl: 36), it does not clarify the number of the nations or their prophets.

However, more than twenty prophets (as) have been mentioned in the Holy Qur’an and the stories of some others have been narrated without referring to their names (Refer to Surah Baqarah: 246, 256). On the other hand, in some traditions from the Prophet’s family members (as), it has been stated (Refer to Risaalah I’teqhaadaat as-saduqh, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 11, p. 28?30?32?41) that Almighty God has appointed one hundred and twenty four thousand prophets (as), and that the chain of prophets began with Adam (as) and ended with Muhammad (saws) the son of Abdullah.

God’s prophets (as) have had various characteristics: They have been guides (Nabi), which is the main responsibility for this Divine position, ‘warners’ (Natheer or Monthir), and ‘providers of glad tidings’ (Bashir or Mobasher) (Refer to Surah Baqarah: 213, Nisa: 165). They have also been known as the best (Saleheen) and the most pious (Mokhlaseen) people some of whom have held the position of ‘Messengers of God’ (Resaalah) aswell. In some sayings, the number of Divine messengers is said to be three hundred and thirteen (Refer to Bihaar al-anwaar Vol. 11, p, 32).

Therefore, in this part, I will explain the definition of prophet and messenger aswell as the differences between them.

Prophets and God’s Messengers

The word ‘Messenger’ (Rasul) means the one who brings a message, and the word Prophet (Nabi), if derived from the root (Naba’) means important news, and if derived from (Nabu) means holding an outstanding position.

Some have thought that the word ‘Prophet’ includes the meaning of the word ‘Messenger’; therefore, they claim that a Prophet is a person who receives revelation from Almighty God, whether or not he has the responsibility of advertising it to other people, whereas a ‘Messenger’ is a person who holds the responsibility of advertising God’s message to the public. However, it is not right, because in some verses of the Holy Qur’an, the word ‘Prophet’ is used after the word ‘Messenger’ (Refer to: Maryam: 51, 54). Whereas, according to the above interpretations, the more general word ‘Messenger’ should have preceded the specific one ‘Prophet’. Furthermore, there is no reason for allocating the responsibility of advertising revelation to messengers.

In some traditions, it has been stated that the requisite for the position of Prophet, is that the person should visit the Angel of revelation only in his dreams and when he is awake he would just hear the Angel’s voice; while, the Messenger visits the Angel in his wakefulness (Refer to Usul al Kafi vol 1, p. 176).

However, this can not be due to the interpretation of the word, as the acceptable point is that the word ‘Prophet’ with reference to those to whom it refers –rather than the way it is interpreted – is a more general term than the word ‘Messenger’. In other words, all prophets have held the position of prophecy; nevertheless, the position of a Messenger of God applies to only a group of them. As mentioned before, the number of God’s messengers is three hundred and thirteen. Their position has certainly been higher than that of prophets; however, there has been some degree of hierarchy with reference to the ‘position’ and ‘excellence’ amongst the messengers’ aswell (Refer Surah Baqarah: 253, Isra: 55). Some of them, for example, had the honour of holding the position of Imammah (Refer Surah Baqarah: 124, Anbiya: 73, Sadjah: 24).

The prominent prophets

The Holy Qur’an introduces some of God’s prophets as ‘Those messengers witha strong will’ (ulol-azm) (Refer Surah Ahqaaf: 35); however, their particularities have not been clarified. Moreover, according to the sayings of the Prophet’s family members (as), there have been five prominent prophets: Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, Isa, and Muhammad (as) (Refer to Bihaar al Anwaar vol. 11, p. 33-4, Ma’alem al Nabawah, p. 113). They not only had a distinctive level of patience and tolerance, which has been referred to in the Qur’an, but each of them had a specific religion and a particular Book, and their contemporary or succeeding prophets obeyed their religions until another prominent Prophet was appointed, and a new Book and a new religion were introduced.

It was also clarified that the co-existence of two prophets at the same time has been possible as Lut (as) was contemporary to Ibrahim (as) and Harun (as) was appointed at the same time when Musa (as) was appointed a Prophet. Also Yahya (as) lived with Isa (as) simultaneously.

Some Points

    1. At the end of this lesson, some points are briefly discussed:
    2. God’s prophets (as) have confirmed each other and each one predicted hissuccessor (Refer to: surah Ale Imraan: 81). Therefore, if a person claimed tobe a Prophet and denied his preceding or succeeding prophets, he would bea liar.
    3. God’s prophets (as) did not request any payment or reward for performing their duties (Refer to: Surah An’am: 90, Yasin: 21, Tur: 40, Ghalam: 46 Yunus: 72, Hud: 29?51, Furquan: 57, Shura: 109, 127, 145, 164, 180); only the Prophet of Islam (saws) has recommended his nation to be friends withthe knowledgeable people (Refer to: Surah Shura: 23) and has considered it as the reward for his endeavour. In this way, he urged his nation to obey the (instructions given by the Islamic) scholars. The benefits of such obedience will in fact return to the nation themselves (Refer to: Surah Saba:47).
    4. Some prophets (as) have had other exalted positions such as ‘Judge’ and ‘Governor’ (Dauood and Sulaiman). In addition, verse 64 of Surah Nisa has necessitated the unconditional obedience of every Prophet. Therefore, it can be inferred that all the prophets (as) have had the same Divine positions.
    5. The Jinn, who have the freedom of decision-making and are responsible for their deeds, and in normal conditions are invisible, were aware of the invitations made by some of God’s prophets (as). The pious Jinn believed in them, Musa (as) and Muhammad (saws) each having some followers from among them. However, there also existed a group of Jinn who obeyed Satan and disbelieved in God’s prophets (as) (Refer to: Surah Jinn: 1-14).


Lesson Thirty
Prophets and the People

Introduction
The people’s reaction against the prophets (as)
Reasons and motivations underlying the opposition against the prophets (as)
Behaviour towards the prophets (as)
a) Contempt
b) Slander and unjust accusations
c) Dispute and chicanery
d) Threats and allurement
e) Violence and murder
Some Divine approaches in ruling a society


Introduction

When referring to the prophets (as) and their illustrious lives, the Holy Qur’an discloses the reactions of the people against them. On one side we are informed about the stance the people took towards the prophets (as) and the reasons for their opposition. On the other side the methods employed by the prophets (as) to guideand educate the people are explained and the way in which they struggled against the roots of blasphemy, polytheism, and deviation. The Holy Qur’an upholds Divine regulations for governing societies, particularly with reference to the mutual relationships between people and prophets. Such discussions include the most instructive and insightful issues.

These points are not in direct relation with ideological or discoursal points. This is due to the fact that they shed light on prophecy and its related aspects, and destroy a number of relevant doubts, and due to their importance in teaching and educating people and functioning as examples for the people to learn from, they are considered to be vital. Therefore, in this lesson, I will discuss some of the most important points of this nature.

The people’s reaction against the prophets (as)

When God’s prophets (as) began to invite people to worship the unique God (Refer to: Nahl: 36, Anbiya: 25, Fusselat: 14, Ahqaaf: 21), obey His orders, stay away from idols and false gods, avoid Satan and other misleaders, and refuse committing oppression, corruption and wrong doing, they generally faced opposition from the people. (Refer to: Ibrahim: 9, Mu’minun: 44). Such opposers were the rulers of societies, the rich who were drowning in their own worldly pleasures (Refer to: Sabaa: 34) and proud of their wealth, social positions, or knowledge (Refer to: Ghafir: 83 Qasas: 78, Zumar: 49). They held great influence and managed to mislead many away from the true path of life (Refer to: Ahzaab: 67, Sabaa: 31-33). Nevertheless, little by little, a group of people who were mainly among the deprived accepted the prophets’ invitation (Refer to: Hud: 40).

However it has rarely occurred that a society has been formed on the principles of correct beliefs, norms of justice and with obedience to God and His prophets (as).

As for instance, that which happened at the time of Suleiman (as). Nevertheless, some of the Divine teachings gradually affected the culture of some societies and were later transferred to others.

In some cases, the prophets’ teachings and instructions were introduced as the innovations of the leaders of the unbelievers. Many of today’s law systems in the world have taken the rules and regulations from Divine religions; however, without referring to their sources they introduce such regulations as original.

Reasons and motivations behind the opposition of the prophets (as)

In addition to the desire for corruption and worldly pleasure (Refer to: Maidah:70), there were other reasons and motivations behind the opposition against the prophets (as). More generally traits such as selfishness, pride and self-praise appeared amongst the rich, noble and more knowledgeable of societies (Refer to: Ghaffir: 56, A’raaf: 76). Another reason was the bias that such people held concerning the wrong customs and beliefs of their ancestors, which were erroneously respected by various societies. (Refer to: Baqarah: 170, Maidah: 104, A’raaf: 28, Yunus: 78, Anbiya: 53,Shu’ara’: 74, Luqmaan: 21, Zukhruuf: 22-3). The protection of economical benefits and social positions were strong motivations for the rich people, the rulers, and the scientists (Refer to: Hud 84-6, Qasas: 76-9, Tawbah: 34); and the ignorance and lack of knowledge among the public were the main reasons behind their deception from the unbelieving leaders and their obedience towards the societal authorities. It was in turn, the cause for their feeling of satisfaction with their false beliefs and their refusal of the religion, which had already been accepted by a few people who mainly held no important social positions and had been rejected by the authorities and the majority of the societies. However, the pressure imposed by the rulers and the oppressors on the deprived should not be ignored (Refer to: Ibrahim: 21, Faater: 47, Hud: 27, Shu’ara’: 111)

Behaviour towards the prophets (as)

The opponents of the prophets (as) employed various methods to prevent the progress of their invitation:

Contempt

A group of people would try to suppress the status of the prophets (as) by despising, mocking, and insulting them (Refer to:Hijr: 11, Yasin: 30, Zukhruf: 7, Mutaffifin: 29-32)) so that the public would pay no attention to them.

Slander and unjust accusations

Then they would spread slander and lies, and attribute unjust accusations to the prophets (as), such as claiming they were mad etc (Refer to:A’raf: 66, Baqarah: 13, Mu’minoon: 25). When the prophets (as) performed miracles, they slandered them by calling them magicians and tricksters (Refer to: Dhariyaat: 39, 52, 53, Anbiya: 3, Qamaar: 2); they also described the Divine messages as being myths and imaginary tales (Refer to: An’aam: 25, Anfal: 31, Nahl: 24, Mu’minoon: 83, Furqaan: 5, Naml: 68, Ahqaaf: 17, Qalaam: 15, Mutaffifin: 14).

Dispute and chicanery

The leaders of the unbelievers would prohibit people from listening to the prophets (as) when they warned them of the results of blasphemy and rebellion against God, and the benefits and rewards of following the true way, even though they used reason and wisdom in their speeches. Such infidels would then employ weak and ridiculous arguments, covered in beautiful words in an attempt to deceive the public and prevent them from obeying the prophets (as) (Refer to: Nuh: 7,Fusselat: 26, An’aam: 112?121, Ghafir: 5, 35, A’raf: 70, 71, Kahf: 56). In so doing, they frequently mentioned their ancestors’ way of life (Refer to: Baqarah: 170, Maidah: 104, A’raf: 28, Anbiya: 53, Yunus: 78, Luqman: 21) and always proudly referred to their wealth and worldly progress. They also referred to the worldly weaknesses and backwardness of the prophets’ followers, as an indicator of their false beliefs and behaviour (Refer to: Yunus: 88, Sabaa: 35, Qalam: 14, Maryam: 77,Muddathir: 12, Muzammel: 11, Ahqaaf: 11). In some cases they argued as to why God had not chosen his messengers from amongst the angels, and as to why had the prophets not been accompanied by angels. They also argued as to why had God not provided the prophets (as) with enough economical and financial support (Refer to:An’aam: 7-9, Isra: 90-5, Furqaan 4-8). On some occasions, they went to the extent that they said: “We will believe (in God) provided that the revelation is exposed to us, or we see God and listen to His words directly” (Baqarah: 118, An’aam: 124, Nisa: 153).

Threats and allurement

Another method of opposition that is mentioned in the Holy Qur’an is that the various nations would threaten the prophets (as) and their followers with torture, and drive them out of their town or country by trying to stone them to death or by other means of execution (Refer to: Ibrahim: 13, Maryam: 46, Hud: 91, Yasin: 18, Ghafir: 26). The infidels to the contrary, allured the people by spending vast quantities of money, in order to make them disobey the prophets (as) (Refer to: Anfaal: 36).

Violence and murder

Finally, when the unbelievers faced the patience, tolerance, firmness, and coolness of the prophets (as), (Refer to: Ibrahim: 12) and realised the seriousness and dedication of the prophets’ true followers, they lost hope with their propaganda and other discouraging tricks and instead made threats through violent means, which subsequently resulted in the murder of many of the prophets (as) (Refer to: Baqarah:61, 87, 91, Maidah: 70, Al-e Imraan: 21, 112, 181, Nisa: 155). This left the society deprived of the greatest heavenly gifts and the most deserving social leaders.

Some heavenly approached in ruling societies

The main reason behind the mission of the prophets (as) was to enlighten the people concerning matters pertaining to this world and the Hereafter, and through revelation to provide them with all the necessary proof of His existence (Refer to Nisa: 65, TaHa: 134). However Almighty God due to His endless mercy and most perfect wisdom provided the people with a specific psychological background from which to accept the prophets’ (as) invitation, at the time of their mission. Such a background also assisted the development of the prophets’ (as) movement. Moreover, since the greatest reason for one’s infidelity and refusal of God, is the feeling of being free from want (Refer to: ‘Alaq: 6) and ignorance concerning the dominant and multi-sided needs of mankind, the most perfect Lord prepared the situation so that the people were aware of their needs and put their ignorance, pride, and selfishness aside. In so doing, the Almighty God allowed the people to face certain problems and preoccupations in order to make them discover their deficiencies and turn towards Him (Refer to: An’aam: 42, A’raf: 95).

However, those whose hearts were as hard as stone, as mentioned in the Qur’an, were not affected by such problems due to their luxurious lives and amassed wealth, and subsequently they did not accept the message bought to them by the prophets (as) (Refer to:An’aam: 43, Muminuun: 76) thus continuing their ignorant and false way of life. Such people were unaffected by the prophets’ (as) warnings and advice and accounted for any change in life of hardship into ease as the requisites of life itself, and their ancestors had also experienced such occurrences (Refer to: A’raf: 95). In this way, they continued their oppression, accumulation of wealth, and developing of power. They ignored the fact that increased wealth and other social merits might in fact be a Divine trap and cause their misfortune in this world and the Hereafter (Refer to: A’raf: 182-3, Al-e Imraan: 178, Tawbah: 55, 85, Muminuun: 54-6).

Nevertheless, when the prophets (as) reached the stage whereby they had numerous followers, they were able to establish an independent society, defend themselves and fight against the enemies of God under the mission of Holy war (Jihad), (Refer to: Al-e Imraan: 146). (Refer to: Tawbah: 14). If the situation arose whereby it was impossible to fight against the unbelievers, the people obeyed the prophets (as) and left their society. When all hope had faded of the unbelieversrepenting, the punishment of God plagued their societies in various ways (Refer to 203 Ankabut: 40). This indeed is the ever-lasting approach of God in governing human society (Refer to: Faatir: 43, Ghafir: 85, Isra: 77).

2 responses to “Pandangan Dunia Islam Tauhidi: Theological Instruction (1-30)

  1. Afwan, jika membutuhkan madu silahkan ke http://jualmaduasli.wordpress.com. InsyaAllah terjamin kemurniannya dan asli dari jawa tengah. Terima kasih

  2. salam, baru samapai nubuwwah doang ya…. klo yang sisanya (imamah, ma`ad) ada ngga? Syukran

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s