قال الله تعالی:

إِنَّمَا یُرِیدُ اللَّهُ لِیُذْهِبَ عَنْکُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَیْتِ وَیُطَهِّرَکُمْ تَطْهِیرًا

Indeed, Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification.

(Surat al-Ahzab 33:33).

Prophetic traditions, mentioned in most reliable Sunni and Shi‘ite reference books of hadith and tafsir (Qur’anic Exegesis), confirm that this holy verse was revealed to exclusively involve the five People of the Cloak; namely, Muhammad, ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, peace be upon them, to whom the term ‘Ahl al-Bayt (People of the House)’ is solely dedicated.

For instance, refer to the following references:

(1) Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH), al-Musnad, 1:331; 4:107; 6:292, 304. (2) Sahih Muslim (d. 261 AH), 7:130. (3) At-Tirmidhi (d. 279 AH), Sunan, 5:361 et al. (4) Ad-Dulabi (d. 310 AH), al-Dhurriyyah at-Tahirah al-Nabawiyyah, p. 108. (5) Al-Nassa’i (d. 303 AH), as-Sunan al-Kubra’, 5: p. 108, 113. (6) Al-Hakim an-Naysaburi (d. 405 AH), al-Mustadrak ‘ala’s-Sahihayn, 2:416, 3:133, 146, 147. (7) Az-Zarkashi (d. 794 AH), al-Burhan, p. 197. (8) Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852), Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:104.

As for Shi‘ite reference books of hadith, refer to the following references:

(1) Al-Kulayni (d. 328 AH), Usul al-Kafi, 1:287. (2) Ibn Babawayh (d. 329 AH), al-Imamah wa’t-Tabsirah, p. 47, H. 29. (3) Al-Maghribi (d. 363 AH), Da’a’im al-Islam, pp. 35, 37. (4) As-Saduq (d. 381 AH), al-Khisal, pp. 403, 550. (5) At-Tusi (d. 460 AH), al-Amali, H. 438, 482, 783.

For more details, refer to the exegesis of the holy verse involved in the following reference books of tafsir: (1) At-Tabari (d. 310 AH), Book of Tafsir. (2) Al-Jassass (d. 370 AH), Ahkam al-Qur’an. (3) Al-Wahidi (d. 468 AH), Asbab an-Nuzul. (4) Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH), Zad al-Masir. (5) Al-Qurtubi (d. 671 AH), al-Jami‘ li-Ahkam al-Qur’an. (6) Ibn Kathir (d. 774 AH), Book of Tafsir. (7) Ath-Tha’alibi (d. 825 AH), Book of Tafsir. (8) As-Suyuti (d. 911 AH), ad-Durr al-Manthur. (9) Ash-Shawkani (d. 1250 AH), Fath al-Qadir. (10) Al-‘Ayyashi (d. 320 AH), Book of Tafsir. (11) Al-Qummi (d. 329 AH), Book of Tafsir. (12) Furt al-Kufi (d. 352 AH), Book of Tafsir; in the margin of the exegesis of verse 4:59. (13) At-Tabrisi (d. 560 AH), Majma‘ al-Bayan, as well as many other reference books of hadith and tafsir.

p: 2

Philosophy of Religion

p: 3

قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صلی الله علیه و آله:

إنِّی تَارِکٌ فِیکُمُ الثَّقَلَیْنِ: کِتَابَ اللهِ وَعِتْرَتِی أهْلَ بَیْتِی، مَا إنْ تَمَسَّکْتُمْ بِهِمَا لَنْ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدِی أبَداً، وَإنَّهُمَا لَنْ یَفْتَرِقَا حَتَّی یَرِدَا عَلَیَّ الْحَوْضَ.

The Messenger of Allah s said:

“Verily, I am leaving among you two precious things [Thaqalayn]: The Book of Allah and my progeny [‘Itrah], the members of my Household [Ahl al-Bayt]. If you hold fast to them, you shall never go astray. These two will never separate from each other until they meet me at the Pond [haw¤] (of Kawthar).”

Some references:

Al­Hakim an­Nayshaburi, Al­Mustadrak ‛ala al-Sahihayn (Beirut), vol. 3, pp. 109-110, 148, 533

Muslim, Al-Sahih, (English translation), book 31, hadiths 5920-3

At­Tirmidhi, Al-Sahih, vol. 5, pp. 621-2, hadiths 3786, 3788; vol. 2, p. 219

An-Nassa’i, Khasa’is ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, hadith 79

Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Al-Musnad, vol. 3, pp. 14, 17, 26; vol. 3, pp. 26, 59; vol. 4, p. 371; vol. 5, pp. 181-182, 189-190

Ibn al­Athir, Jami‛ al­Usul, vol. 1, p. 277

Ibn Kathir, Al­Bidayah wa’n­Nihayah, vol. 5, p. 209

Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‛A¨im, vol. 6, p. 199

Nasir ad-Din al-Albani, Silsilat al-Ahadith as-sahihah (Kuwait: Ad-Dar as-Salafiyyah), vol. 4, pp. 355-358

p: 4

PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION

‘Allamah Muhammad Taqī Ja‘farī

Translator

Mansoor Limba

Cultural Affairs Department

Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) World Assembly

p: 5

نام کتاب: فلسفه دین

نویسنده: علامه محمد تقی جعفری

تهیه کننده: اداره ترجمه مجمع جهانی اهل بیت علیهم السلام

مترجم: دکتر منصور لیمبا

زبان ترجمه: انگلیسی

Title: Philosophy of Religion

Author: ‘Allamah Muhammad Taqī Ja‘farī

Project Supervisor: Translation Unit, Cultural Affairs Department; the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) World Assembly (ABWA)

Translator and typesetter: Mansoor Limba, PhD

Editor: Iffat Shah

Proofreader: Badr Shahin

Layout: Zahra Golzar

Publisher: ABWA Publishing and Printing Center

First Printing: 2014

Printed by: Mojab Press

Copies: 3,000

ISBN 964-8686- -

© Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) World Assembly (ABWA)

All rights reserved.

www.ahl-ul-bait.org

info@ahl-ul-bait.org

p: 6

p: 7

p: 8

p: 9

p: 10

p: 11

p: 12

p: 13

p: 14

Transliteration Symbols

p: 15

p: 16

Assembly has endeavored to enter the new phase of these worthy experiences within the framework of research and writing works of the contemporary Shī‘ah writers or those who, through the divine guidance, embraced this noble school.

This Assembly is also engaged in the study and publication of the valuable works of the pious predecessors and outstanding Shī‘ah personalities so that those who are thirsty of truth could quench their thirst from this refreshing fountain by listening and embracing this truth, which the Holy Prophet’s Household (‘a) has offered as gift to the entire world.

It is hoped that the dear readers would not deprive the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) World Assembly of their valuable views and suggestions as well as constructive criticisms in this arena.

We also do invite the scholars, translators and other institutions to assist us in propagating the pure Muhammadan s(1) Islam.

We ask God, the Exalted, to accept this ntrivial effort and enhance it further under the auspices of His vicegerent on earth, Hadrat al-Mahdī (may Allah, the Exalted, expedite his glorious advent).

It is appropriate here to express our utmost gratitude to the late ‘Allamah Muhammad Taqī Ja‘farī for writing the book,(2) and to Dr. Mansoor Limba for translating it, as well as to all our honorable colleagues in accomplishing this task especially the dear ones in the Translation Office for performing their responsibility.

Cultural Affairs Department

Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) World Assembly

p: 18

knowing reality. When the ‘Allamah was still alive, this work was published in several issues of the newspaper, Ittila‘at. The non-availability of the author’s manuscript and the errors in the existing text caused enormous difficulties in arranging and publishing it. Finally, its encoded copy with new headings is presented here.

The last part of this volume is a set of questions and answers about pluralism, first published in the 7-8 issue of the journal, Naqd wa Na¨ar. Since this issue is related to the philosophy of religion, it is also included in this volume.

It is noteworthy that the undersigned edited the abovementioned parts of the book, particularly Parts 1, 3 and 4, while taking into account the writing style of the author, and to a certain extent this edited version has simplified the intricacies in the text. No doubt, if the late thinker were alive, he would have presented this work in a perfect form.

Wa ’s-salam,

‘Abd Allah Nasrī

[Editor]

p: 20

Editor’s Introduction

The discourse on the definition of religion includes the following steps: At the outset, there is a methodological introduction to the possibility of a definition in the various fields of social sciences and humanities, in general, and the study of religion, in particular, elucidated and elaborated by the editor. He has also appended some methodological questions to it. The ‘Allamah wrote concise replies to pertinent questions.

After the methodological introduction, it was agreed that leading definitions of religion in principal sources and a brief analysis of the key concepts in the intellectual framework of the scholars that defined religion be presented, so that the ‘Allamah could systematically assess those definitions according to his epistemological framework. This decision was not implemented except in two cases, viz. the definitions of James and Jung who were among the prominent and macro-theoretician psychologists in the modern study of religion, and then, due to the passing away of the ‘Allamah, it was not continued. Many other definitions were explored by researchers of the Institute of Islamic Culture and Thought and the ‘Allamah was able to cite and analyze them. For the sake of faithfulness to the original text, there is no modification of any sort in the ‘Allamah’s expressions which are also identified as such.

p: 22

5. Question about the cause of emergence (demonstrative lam); and

6. Question about the reason for emergence (affirmative lam).

In every field of knowledge, systematic inquiry must observe the logical sequence of subjects. Thus, before dealing with the properties, effects and rules of every matter and even before embarking on the affirmation and negation of a matter, one must obtain its clear and distinct definition. Without it, serious differences in the analysis of issues emerge. For this reason, one cannot embark on its affirmation or negation without a clear mental picture of it, and in the realm of rules, one cannot talk about its properties and effects.

The origin of inclination towards religion and its impact is one of the important debates in the various branches of the study of religion such as, the psychology of religion, the sociology of religion, the history of religions, the philosophy of religion, theology, and modern scholasticism. No doubt, one of the reasons behind the emergence of diverse and contradictory views in analyzing these two matters is the absence of a clear and unified definition of religion. An acceptable definition will clarify whether contradictory views pertain to a single subject or not.

If two mutually discordant theories on the effect of religiosity stem from two different perceptions of religion, they are not mutually discordant and the relationship between them is an amphibology of contradiction, and not real contradiction.

The Muslim logicians’ emphasis on the primacy of definition of the subject as a [guiding] principle in every debate or dispute has been much welcomed today by analytic philosophers. The analytic philosophers’ maxim “Explain the perceptions first and clarify the meaning of concepts embedded in the claim so that we can subsequently talk about the validity or invalidity of the claim,” emphasises the logical primacy of definition over other subjects.

In essence, the requisite for dealing with a subject is its clear and common definition. For instance, as long as there is unclear, unambiguous, distinct definition of fatalism (jabr) and freewill (ikhtiyar), one cannot discuss this issue. It often happens that a scholar engages in refuting freewill and another brings proof to affirm it, and yet a third thinker regards it as impossible to negate or affirm. In spite of the amphibology of contradiction among these three views, the mutually discordant perceptions about freewill, there is no

p: 24

real contradiction among their viewpoints because they do not have a single and identical object of study.

Therefore, before commencing discussions on the philosophy of religion and the enormous disputes, it is necessary to deal with its definition by examining and assessing the definitions being presented. Whenever a question about the relationship between religion and freedom, religion and ideology, religion and art, and religion and development is raised, it must be asked, “What is meant by ‘religion’?” When there is talk about the exclusivity, universality or pluralism of religion, it must be asked, “What is the theoreticians’ view about religion?” This is because without presenting a clear definition, the discussion will be deceptive and erroneous and the fallacy of common expression will always be committed. To present a definition, particularly in relation to multidimensional and intricate phenomena, is very difficult. However, the difficulty in defining cannot be a reason for us to refrain from offering a definition, thus leaving the audience in ambiguity and confusion.]

Differentiation is of two types: (1) essential differentiation or conceptual differentiation, and (2) accidental differentiation or differentiation in particulars and properties. That which shows essential differentiation is called “definition” and that which presents accidental differentiation is called “description”. If the definition is such that all the essentials embedded in the described thing are included, it is called “comprehensive definition”. Although comprehensive definition is the most credible one ever possible for the identification of a matter, to obtain it is either difficult or impossible because it is not easy to identify all the essentials of a thing. Therefore, non-comprehensive definitions are sufficient for the majority.

Non-comprehensive definitions are varied—linear and accidental variations. Linear variation refers to the various definitions which are not of the same level, such as definition of meaning, definition by example, definition by the negation of contradiction, definition of properties, as well as lexical, stipulative, ostensive, abstractive and recursive definitions.(1)

Accidental variation refers to the various definitions of the same kind, such as many descriptions of a single matter. This variation stems from the multiplicity of apparent properties and particulars.

Variation in definition stems from the variation in the objectives and expectations meant in the definition. Sometimes, the purpose is merely suggestive of a meaning’s association with a certain word. In this case, a stipulative definition is to be presented. There is a time when the purpose is to determine the scope [of meaning] of the expression and to mention examples to which the concept correctly applies. In this case, ostensive definition is used. At times, the intention is to define the particulars of the differentiator. In this case, specifying definition or “description” is presented.

One instance of error in defining is its inappropriate use, i.e. presenting a stipulative definition but claiming that its aim is to describe the differentiator. It must be stated what type of definition is being given and

p: 26

what is expected from it. This error is frequently committed while defining religion. A complete picture of religion cannot be drawn from a mere ostensive definition. In assessing the definitions of religion, the explanatory function of the definition must be clearly stated. Therefore, based on the point stipulated in the text,(1) we are not after an all-encompassing definition but its description. Thus, the type of the definition and the aspects of religion it means to explain must be specified.(2)]

Definition has at least two basic conditions: (1) conceptual clarity and (2) functional conformity. Firstly, the definition must be totally clear. Ambiguous definitions are inadequate as they do not offer any definite knowledge and clear image. Secondly, the definition must be such that the limit (hadd) or indicator (mu‘arrif) conforms exactly to the limited (mahdūd) or indicated one (mu‘arraf). That is, the totality of manifestations of the indicator and the indicated must be the same. Most logical conditions of definition are traceable to these two conditions.(1)

The definition of man as “a complex machine” is an example of inadequate definition, as it lacks conceptual clarity and functional conformity. This is because the meaning of “complex” is ambiguous and thus complex! It does not give a clear picture of the issue. Besides, it is not in conformity with all individuals, for the totality of applications of man with a complex machine is contradictory.

the limited one (mahdūd). The inclusion of anything alien to the thing being defined leads to ambiguity in the definition. In order to avoid the emergence of such ambiguity, logicians have pointed out that the ideal definition is that which is clear and lucid and at the same time parsimonious in concepts. Description and explanation are different from definition. In explanations, many rules, and particulars of a thing can be stated, while in defining, only its nature must be shown.]

The second factor refers to verbal disputes. A famous example was that of a Turk, a Persian and an Arab who wanted to eat something together. They had a dispute on what they would eat. The Turk said, “For today’s lunch, I want to eat üzüm (“grape” in Turkish). The Persian said, “What is üzüm? We must eat angūr (انگور) (“grape” in Persian) today.” The Arab said, “I want neither üzüm nor anggūr. The best food [for today] is ‘inab (عنب) (“grape” in Arabic).” Someone who was familiar with the three languages entered the scene of a baseless dispute and said, “Give me the money so that I can buy and bring whatever food each of you wants.” He brought grapes for all of them, and realized the baseless dispute caused by their ignorance of the other two languages.(1)

[Exposition: One of the logical conditions of definition is to avoid using unfamiliar or uncommon words. Clear and accurate language is the most important condition of definition,(2) since unfamiliar words give rise to verbal dispute.

There are other linguistic causes of defect in a definition which can be briefly pointed out below:

- “Definition by concealing” or defining by using concepts which are more complex and ambiguous than the one to be defined;

- “Definition by distancing” or defining by using a concept for whose clarity it needs the words to be defined; and

- Using potential proof, common word, metaphor, allegory, and any expression which causes ambiguity in conveying the intended

p: 29

meaning.

اشتراک لفظ دایم رهزن است اشتراک گبر و مؤمن در تن است

A word with several meanings always obstructs (the understanding): the similarity between the infidel with the true believer is in the body (alone).(1)

Most of the errors in definition are rooted in psychological and personal factors, which impel a person to adopt defective definitions. Among these factors are the following:]

The third factor is the prior principle which interferes in the definition. An example is the definition of man as a fierce creature, which is rooted in the way of thinking of Hobbes(2) and his likes, and which inspired him to say that “Man is a wolf to [his fellow] man.”(3)

[Exposition: Every person is influenced by his learning and presumptions. However, a dogmatic attitude toward abstract and concrete things controlled by the framework of one’s views is erroneous. Many examples of this type of error in the analysis of religious matters like “religious experience” by Freud,(4) Marx(5) and others can be seen. According to Jung,(6) in all his

p: 30

definitions, Freud was a prisoner of the theory of the unconscious and he would see everything within that framework.(1)]

The fourth factor is the justification of a definition with scientific intents in a branch of science, such as the definition of the “earth” with an agricultural intent, which is different from the definition of the earth with a civil engineering intent.

طالب هر چیز ای رشید جز همان چیزی که می خواهد ندید

O enlightened friend! He who seeks everything

Cannot see anything except what he wants.(2)

[Exposition: The selective nature of studies prevalent in empirical sciences causes every scientist to look within his own framework and thus, to know [only] a particular dimension of the thing. This methodological exclusivism became prevalent particularly with the emergence of modern science and positivism, and its outcome was the new error of [focusing on] an aspect of a thing instead of its nature, or what is called today as “insignificant error”. An interdisciplinary study, which is a sort of methodological pluralism, is the way of correcting this error. Methodological exclusivism has other dimensions explained under the fifth factor of defect in definition.]

The fifth factor is difference in the facts, skill, and experience in scientific subjects and problems. An example is the difference of opinion between a classical physicist who would define matter as “a body which occupies space”, and a modern physicist who is engrossed in quantum mechanics.

[Exposition

The difference of perspectives that leads to the difference in definition is of two types. [One is] the accidental difference like the one stated in the fourth factor. The difference of perspectives between the physicists and the chemists in analyzing a single phenomenon gives rise to the difference in opinions. The other difference is traced to the linear difference on the multiple levels of reality. Every person defines a thing according to the extent of his or her experience. In conventional or common experience,

p: 31

nature has an independent existence, and in another experience, the nature of its connections can be shown.]

The sixth factor consists of the effects that give rise to sensitivity or mirth on the subject being defined. Similar to the rejection of religion because of witnessing its abuse is the sensitivity about pure science which usually results in individual sensitivities, thereby depriving the person of attaining the truth of the matter. Anger and carnal desire disrupt the psychological balance, thus depriving the person of knowing the real nature of things.

خشم و شهوت مرد را احول کند از استقامت روح را مبدل کند

Anger and carnal desire makes a man squint-eyed,

Transforming the soul from [its] resistance.

Reliable traditions have also pointed to this truth:

حُبُّ ٱلشَّی یُعْمیٰ وَیُصَمّ.

“Love for something makes one blind and deaf.”

Those who deal with realities from specific psychological perspectives will miss the [true] nature of those realities. People, like Freud, who consider religion as superstitious can never arrive at a correct definition of religion, because the requisite of knowing the truth of a thing is not to have any opinion about it. When contumacy or enmity influences a thing negatively, he will not arrive at anything except at what he wants.

The seventh factor is ignorance or insufficient knowledge about the cause of a thing. Regarding the definitions of religion being stated, we can see a lot of instances of this factor.(1)

The eighth factor is paying attention to only some aspects of a thing. As much as possible, all levels, dimensions and elements of the thing must be taken into account, and not only one or two dimensions. This appeared after religion was separated from mundane life and secular ideas (negation of religion from life) prevailed in the West.

As will be shown in this research, most of these definitions of religion have presented an obscure background of one or some limited aspects of religion, juxtaposing it against science, wisdom, philosophy, politics, and civilization. For this reason, this sort of definition lacks academic value and should never

p: 32

be taken as the criterion for affirming or negating religion.

Regrettably, after learning mechanical theories on all realities of the world including man and nature, the same defective and sketchy definitions have transformed all social sciences and humanities under the pretext of knowing and manufacturing amenities of life by following mechanical laws, such that today we can say that only very few things are defined by considering their real nature. For instance, we can briefly cite the following examples:

1. In view of the existence of the human mind or psyche, the correct definition of freedom is supposedly like this: “Freedom means supervision and control over the positive and negative sides of an action.” The contrary definition is a notion similar to this: “Freedom means the ability of man to do or not to do a thing”, which is a very simplistic and common notion about freedom. We know that in understanding the real meaning of freedom with the correct definition, we must also take into consideration two stages of freedom—before and after it. The stage prior to freedom refers to “emancipation” which only removes the shackles of oppression. The stage of acquisition refers to freewill which values freedom.

2. If we want to find the definition of politics in its prevalent meaning today, we will see that its common definition is the administration of society’s affairs according to the politician’s power, taste and goal. However, the real definition of politics is the due administration of human lives by activating the positive talents of society’s members for the attainment of material and spiritual felicity.

[Exposition: The definition’s inclusion of all dimensions of the thing being defined (mu‘arraf) is among the conditions of its perfection. However, intrinsic and accidental dimensions must first be differentiated, for the definition’s inclusion of all dimensions and aspects of the mu‘arraf is not possible today. Secondly, it is very difficult, nay impossible, to deal with all essential levels, dimensions and elements of the mu‘arraf in cases in which the mu‘arraf is a multidimensional matter or a complex phenomenon.

Most of those who have attempted to define religion admit that a perfect definition, which includes all aspects of religion, is impossible.(1) For this reason, the phrase, “as much as possible”, is included in the definitions. The

p: 33

point which is of great importance is the ‘fallacy of generalization’, as it is called in the West. In defining a thing, if a person focuses only on some dimensions of it for whatever reason, and then thinks that whatever he observes is the totality of the thing, commits the fallacy of generalization. But if it is mentioned that this definition is only true to certain cases of the mu‘arraf, this definition—provided that there are logical rules—can be accepted as one of the descriptions. For example, in defining religion, William James(1) has done it, not what many people have done.]

arrive at an identical thing, or as what John Hick(1) believes, “Perhaps a single specific feature of the different phenomena which are called ‘religion’ does not exist, but rather it is better to believe in the set of ‘family resemblances’” and take it as the indicator of religion? In empirical inquiry: What is the criterion for determining what is to be called ‘religion’? For example, for religions in which there is no room for the worship of a supreme being, such as Theravada Buddhism, the definition to be considered is the one that also includes such religions. Or, is the method of defining religion logical in the sense that it deals with so-called ‘derivative’ definitions? That is, just as a term is considered to have a certain meaning in the beginning, the same is also incorporated in its definition. Examples are the definitions based upon phenomenology, some psychological definitions (like the definition of William James), and some sociological definitions (like the definition of Parsons(2)).

As such, where should one begin in defining religion? Should one first present a definition with prior concepts of religion and then assess through it the authenticity of whatever is called ‘religion’, thereby distinguishing true religions from the false ones? Or, on the contrary, should one first explore whatever is called ‘religion’ and then by studying all of them, extract the special common feature as the essence of religion, or based on the theory of ‘family resemblances’, should one set forth the totality of descriptions and arrive at the definition of religion?]

In reply to this question, it is necessary to explain the logical and empirical methods. Some thinkers in recent times have stated that the logical method of definition refers to reasoning through general premises which are already proven or do not need to be proven, and to be collated with particular premises (cases and manifestations) in order to arrive at a conclusion. Take, for example, these premises: “There is a reality beyond perception.” “A whole number is either odd or even,” and “The whole is greater than the part.” This method is called reasoning based on general premises for proving particular premises.

The empirical method is the method of scrutiny, inductive reasoning and

p: 35

experimentation of particular cases in order to arrive at a general conclusion.

If we seriously and closely examine the empirical method, we will conclude that this method (meticulous and inductive) is also important. First and foremost, we begin with a general premise which is reached through particular cases and premises, and then in reasoning, the same general premise is applied to [particular] cases and premises. For instance, we conduct a research, inductive reasoning and experimentation in the form of observing animals and we see that every animal defends itself and protects its life, and it engages in reproductive activities. Out of these observations, we experience a general premise and say, “Every animal defends itself and engages in reproductive activities.” Therefore, in both methods a general premise is used to arrive at the conclusion. The crux of the matter is that in the logical method the general premise is considered already proven and it does not need to be proven again, while in the empirical method the general premise is reached through observations, experiments and scrutiny of cases and manifestations and then applied to them. Some thinkers have set these two methods against each other, calling one ‘logical’ and the other ‘empirical’, which is definitely erroneous, because both methods can be considered ‘logical’. In the former, the movement is from the general to the specific premise, while in the latter, the movement is from specific cases and applications from which the general premise emanated, and then the same general premise is applied to the specific. Of course, there is a difference between the two types of general premise, which is essential to know and that is, usually, when the movement begins from the general, it is universal, applicable to all cases, such as the premise that “The whole is greater than the part”. This is while it is possible that due to inadequacy, the observations and experimentations on specific cases and applications do not include all cases. Thus, the logic of science demands that in this method (empirical and inductive), the level of empirical and observatory conformities must be 90%.

Second, in defining religion, its applications are very important, whether the definition emanates from them (prior empirical definition), or the definition be applied to them (already proven general premises or a priori). But what is the criterion for determining whether that which is called ‘religion’ is a real manifestation of religion or not? For which religion is our definition of religion suitable? How can a religion be devoid of the worship of a Being, and belief in a heavenly scripture be considered religion?

p: 36

Obviously, not only in religion but rather in all truths, whose realization is within the domain of the inward-oriented axis and the outward-oriented axis, observation, examination and inquiry on outward manifestations and cases are as important as inward perception and conception; like, beauty, justice, sense of right and wrong, love, subconscious affections, and the like.

Another issue needing close attention is: “What is the criterion for determining whether that which is called ‘religion’ is a real manifestation of religion or not?”

A more general meaning which we can take into consideration is that “Religion means taking a step beyond the self and believing that above the bestial selfishness and common natural demands, there are truths which must be aspired for as the lofty aim in life, such as ‘nirvana’ in Buddhism, and similar things in other religions. For this reason, this truth has a certain sort of sanctity and luminosity, and movement toward its attainment gives pleasure and delight to the believing person, thus saving him or her from a sense of futility or absurdity. Obviously, the phenomenon stems from a sublime reckoning in life that encompasses a salient feature of religion, although by setting aside God Almighty with all [His] Sublime Attributes mentioned in formal religions, it cannot include all aspects of religion.

Third, should the definition of religion be sought from religion itself, or does it belong to realities outside religion? Is the correct way of attaining the truth of religion by referring to revelation and religious texts, or to tools and methods outside religion; such as, empirical or logical methods? Or, is there basically no separation between these two methods, and “either outside religion or within religion is only superficial”? In reply to this question, we must distinguish two things from each other.

The first is the nature of religion, in addition to its special features, properties, tools, and methods.

The second is to prove the necessity of following religion, which involves desirable acceptance, and a claim can never be proven. However, to prove whether the tools and methods of religion are outside religion or within it, depends on whether these are religious in nature, or conventional and rational. If they are of a religious type, such as the conditionality of ablution (wu¤ū') and the purity of the body and clothes in the ritual prayer (salat) and the attainment of taxable (zakat) items to the taxable limit for which the religious text must be consulted, it is clear that it is within religion. And if

p: 37

they are of a conventional or rational type, such as most subjects, it is clear that their definition and the knowledge about them are outside religion. In different subjects, the foundations of religion refer people to conventional and rational facts. Similarly, two types of methods can be observed:

The first type is extra-religious and the second type is intra-religious. The method of affirming religious laws which depends on the use of religious proofs and rational thinking, and not any personal or specific taste, such as emotions, imaginary premises, unproven hypothetical questions, and the like, is intra-religious. On the other hand, since the very ways of attaining knowledge and a sound mind are personal matters, they directly involve relying on extra-religious matters. Relying on them also has an intra-religious dimension from a general perspective, taking into account the spirit of “Allah does not task any soul beyond its capacity.”(1)

Fourth: Can a definition of religion encompass all dimensions, or is it enough to refer to the basic methods of religion? What is the criterion for distinguishing the main part from the secondary parts? As witnessed throughout history, in the realm of science and philosophy, such an ideal definition is unattainable, particularly when it involves the soul, self, personality, mind, and spirit. However, the non-attainability of such an ideal has never resulted in the decline, halt and retrogressive movement of humanity in advanced sciences, philosophy, industry, art, and culture. The long tradition of sciences, worldviews and other truths necessitates definition and proof that, as long as man is capable, he acquires more knowledge about four relationships, viz. the relationship of man with God, his relationship with himself, his relationship with the world, and his relationship with fellow humanity. He does not wait at all for a moment to perfectly know all dimensions—outward and inward—as well as variable potentials of a thing and prove all circumstances pertaining to it. Throughout history, you cannot find even a single mathematician who suspended his activity and efforts in mathematics on the ground that he had not attained the truth of numbers. Similarly, with respect to his inquiries in physics, a physicist would not wait for the time to know perfectly the truth of causation of physical events, and then define and affirm the same. In the same vein, do you know of any

p: 38

psychologist who, under the pretext of not perfectly and accurately knowing the truth of mind, self, intuitive knowledge (self-consciousness), personification, and tens of similar psychological facts, abandons his work and looks for another job?

From these empirical observations, we arrive at the conclusion that in knowing religion one must be contented with the principal elements. The realization of the principal elements of religion and profound acceptance and belief in them leads to the spiritual advancement of a person. Just this degree of knowledge places the believing person in a state of spiritual mirth and growth, or even contributes in the gradual religious enlightenment of another person.

﴿وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَیُعَلِّمُکُمُ اللَّهُ﴾

“Be wary of Allah and Allah shall teach you.”(1)

﴿وَالَّذِینَ جَاهَدُوا فِینَا لَنَهْدِیَنَّهُمْ سُبُلَنَا﴾

“As for those who strive in Us, We shall surely guide them in Our ways.”(2)

﴿یَا أَیُّهَا الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا إِنْ تَتَّقُوا اللَّهَ یَجْعَلْ لَکُمْ فُرْقَانًا﴾

“O, you who have faith! If you are wary of Allah, He shall appoint a criterion(3) for you.”(4)

تو پای به راه در نه و هیچ مگوی خود راه بگویدت که چون باید رفت

Make your own step and never say / That the way has to tell you that it must be trodden.

1. Common definitions based upon a common concept or, common features of religions which attempt to be comprehensive

2. Essentialist definitions which analyze the essence of religion

3. Psychological definitions

4. Sociological definitions

5. Utilitarian definitions

6. Ethical definitions

p: 40

First, concerning the first belief, man is also a reality that is situated between the natural and supernatural worlds.

دو سر هر دو حلقة هستی به حقیقت به هم تو پیوستی

Both two heads are of the axis of existence. Indeed you are also attached to them.

Man’s search in this domain is meant for the improvement of his supernatural asset. Acquiring more knowledge about the dimensions, realities and laws of nature helps him advance in the supernatural realm.

Second, the world of nature’s purposefulness is connected to a principal belief that the world of creation depends on the All-wise and Absolute God, who is devoid of any futile and vain act.

Third, in this definition the question of God is raised ambiguously. That there is a world beyond the world of nature and tangibles is an extremely general statement, for it is possible to refer to a world in which there is no mention of God, such as the world of myths and fables.

Fourth, in saying that the world of being is such that it gives reward or retribution to what is morally good or evil, does ‘the world of being’ refer to this world or include the otherworldly existence as well? If it refers only to this world, then good deeds are not all rewarded in this world. In the same manner, because of this world’s limited capacity [to compensate], the criminals cannot be duly punished for all their crimes in this world. Of course, we have the law of causation, or action and reaction in this world but the capacity of this world is not enough to compensate all human actions. Unless the eternal world is accepted, reward and punishment for what is morally good and bad cannot be considered.

Fifth, in some creeds, particularly the ascetic schools, the abovementioned three points can be seen, without them claiming to be forms of religion.

Sixth, not every moral system is religious. The moral system whose foundation is God, in the sense that the criterion for good and evil in it lies in the Divine commands, has religious dimensions. The foundation of what is morally good and evil in religion is revelation, which is immune from error and deviation. If to say that the world of being perceives what is morally good and evil means that it has the ability to do so, then it is acceptable from a religious perspective, in view of the fact that all parts of the world of being are in a state of glorifying, prostrating and remembering God. And if it

p: 42

means that like human beings, the world of being also acquires knowledge of what is morally good and evil and the perception of the world of being is like human knowledge about the abovementioned matters, then this meaning is not a religious necessity.

That the world of being compensates what is morally good or bad can be interpreted in two ways: One is that the world of being’s giving of reward is like one of the laws which God has prescribed in the world of being. It is the same law of causation whose enactment and implementation is like those of the other laws of God. The other way is that as a warning to His creatures, God the Glorious has directly enacted and implemented the said law. We must know that this causation is only for the awareness of human beings:

﴿کُلُّ نَفْسٍ بِمَا کَسَبَتْ رَهِینَةٌ﴾

“Every soul is hostage to what it has earned.”(1)

Otherwise, because of the incapability of the world of matter to implement absolutely the law of divine justice for good and evil deeds, it can be implemented in the eternal world. It can be said that in this definition, three subjects which are acceptable and of immense importance for religion are mentioned. Yet, it needs to separate performing religious duties and rights from moral cases. On the other hand, there has been no categorical and decisive statement regarding the Sacred Being of God, His control over creation, Attributes of Perfection, and the Resurrection.

6. Worship and other forms of connection with God or gods

7. A general viewpoint about the world as a unit and the station of man in it (worldview)

8. Relatively comprehensive organization of human life based upon such a viewpoint (ideology)

9. A united social group supported by the abovementioned elements (community or church).

toward their sublime Origin. Unity of a religious community is not similar to a racial, geographical, or political organization formed for a particular purpose, such as defense against an enemy. Rather, as stated in Islamic sources, faithful individuals are like a single body; if one part experiences pain, all parts will experience the same. The souls of faithful individuals are like a single soul, and the link of the soul of faithful person to God is stronger than the link between the sun and its rays.(1)

There is no doubt that the affairs of the world of being are connected with sacred truths, which are sometimes distinct from worldly matters. In Islam, however, it can be said that they are related to the world of creation and, all parts of the world of creation, whether they are inward or outward, are divine signs. “Soon We shall show them Our signs in the horizons and in their own souls until it becomes clear to them that He is the Real”(2) and “So whichever way you turn, there is the face of Allah!”(3) It follows then, that in a sense, the entire universe has a sacred dimension.

The phrase “Rites which are concentrated on certain things” means the presence of a set of rites in every religion. It is correct but the taboo rites must be distinguished from rites of worship and other rational inclinations to the metaphysical.

The meaning of the statement, “The guarantor of the implementation of moral rules is God or gods” must be clarified. In this regard, there are some possibilities:

First possibility: It means that God helps human beings so that their actions are consistent with moral rules. Of course, one can infer from the sources of Abrahamic Faiths (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) that the justice and grace of God makes it necessary that He guides His servants to the path of material and spiritual prosperity.

Second possibility: “The guarantor of the implementation of moral rules” means control and stimulation of the pure conscience and not deterministic factors that control actions.

Third possibility: “Moral rules” refer to religious laws, duties and rights

p: 45

because of their association with God. It is because God enacted them and He is cognizant of the interaction of people with one another. If it means this third possibility, then it is closer to reality compared to the other two possibilities.

Specific religious feelings (such as fear, reverence, sense of guilt, and gratitude) which are expressed before sacred things or in the performance of rites:

On one hand, such concepts are not exclusive to religion, for when a rational person sees himself in front of a Real Being higher than him, he experiences a sense of cautiousness coupled with hope, a sense of awe. When a rational and wary person with a sound mind learns of the majesty of the world of being and its vastness and orderliness, he definitely experiences astonishment (and not primitive bewilderment, doubt and skepticism). Similarly, anyone who does something against the law—provided he has a sound mind and personality—will feel ashamed, and this feeling is the result of committing a sin, although he may not use the same terms. Similarly, gratitude or thanksgiving in times of joy caused by material and spiritual favors in life, attributed to mere luck, is a common phenomenon. All such phenomena can have religious underpinning when they connect man to God.

“Worship and other forms of connection with God or gods,” are not acceptable to Abrahamic monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) because ‘gods’ are not objects of worship and other religious connections. In the said religions, there are no such things as ‘gods’ at all.(1)

A general viewpoint about the world as a unit and the station of man in it (worldview):

This viewpoint consists of the following:

The world of being is a creation of God

The world of being is created based upon

the governance and will of God for a lofty purpose

Man in this world is a very important being with various talents by which he can have interactive relationship with all levels and dimensions of the world in which he lives, and the magnitude and quality of his perfection depend on

p: 46

such a relationship.

Man can have two types of honor:

The first type is intrinsic honor:

﴿وَلَقَدْ کَرَّمْنَا بَنِی آدَمَ وَحَمَلْنَاهُمْ فِی الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ وَرَزَقْنَاهُمْ مِنَ الطَّیِّبَاتِ وَفَضَّلْنَاهُمْ عَلَی کَثِیرٍ مِمَّنْ خَلَقْنَا تَفْضِیلا﴾

“Certainly We have honored the Children of Adam, and carried them over land and sea, and provided them with all the good things, and given them an advantage over many of those We have created with a complete preference.”(1)

All human beings possess this honor, if they do not deprive themselves of it by committing treachery (khiyanah).

The second type is acquired honor:

﴿یَا أَیُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاکُم مِّن ذَکَرٍ وَأُنثَی وَجَعَلْنَاکُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا إِنَّ أَکْرَمَکُمْ عِندَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاکُمْ﴾

“O mankind! Indeed We created you from a male and a female, and made you nations and tribes that you may identify one another. Indeed the noblest of you in the sight of Allah is the most God-wary among you.”(2)

Relatively comprehensive organization of human life based upon such a viewpoint (ideology):

This is the same relationship of man with the world, the third of the four relationships upon which all religions with divine origins are organized: (1) man’s relationship with himself; (2) man’s relationship with God; (3) man’s relationship with the world of being; and (4) man’s relationship with his fellow human beings.

Therefore, there will be no objection if we say, “Relatively comprehensive organization of human life based upon the abovementioned four relationships”.

A united social group supported by the abovementioned elements (community or church):

p: 47

In this part of the definition of religion, two ambiguous issues must be examined:

a) The social organization in itself is not a pillar of the essence of religion, for even if only one person or a few people believe in religion in this world, he or they will still constitute a community (ummah). As such, the Noble Qur’an introduces Prophet Ibrahīm (Abraham) (‘a) alone as a community:

﴿إِنَّ إِبْرَاهِیمَ کَانَ أُمَّةً﴾

“Indeed Abraham was a nation.”(1)

Of course, as the number of individuals and communities that follow the religion increases, the social organization of those who believe in the said religion (ummah) also becomes larger.

b) Ummah refers to the group of people who believe in a particular religion, or if we really broaden its meaning, it refers to the group of people that cling to a given ideology, whether it is religious or not.

Like mosque, and other houses of worship built on earth as places of worship, church means a center for collective worship and devotion, unless the original meaning of it is changed into another one.

The duality of the human being in all religions

If this ‘duality’ refers to the physical and spiritual, the dispositional and the behavioral, the outward and the inward, the intrinsic and the extrinsic, it is correct.

Sanctity in the world

Sanctity or sacredness in the world can be considered from two perspectives. The first perspective is that the world relies upon the wisdom and will of God, and the notion of the world as a divine sign (ayah) (both within man and in the outside world) refers to this perspective:

﴿سَنُرِیهِمْ آیَاتِنَا فِی الآفَاقِ وَفِی أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَتَّی یَتَبَیَّنَ لَهُمْ أَنَّهُ الْحَقُّ﴾

“Soon We shall show them Our signs in the horizons and in their own souls until it becomes clear to them that He is the Real”(1)

According to the second perspective, the facility and potential of this world are meant to prepare man and urge him towards the sublime goal of perfection. The ardent desire for it exists in the hearts of all people who are immune from selfishness. In the speech of the Commander of the Faithful, Imam ‘Alī ibn Abī Talib (‘a), in reply to someone who rebuked the world, this perspective is expressed in this manner:

O’ you who abuse the world, O’ you who have been deceived by its deceit and cheated by its wrongs. Do you accuse it or should it accuse you? When did it bewilder you or deceive you? ... Certainly, this world is a house of truth for him who appreciates it; a place of safety for him who understands it; a house of riches for him who collects provision from it (for the next world); and a house of instructions for him who draws instruction from it. It is a place of worship for the lovers of Allah; the place of praying for the angels of Allah; the place where the revelation of Allah descends; and the marketing place for those devoted to Allah.”(2)

The division of all things into tangible and intangible

This division is not a distinctive feature of religions although this is acceptable in religions as an undeniable fact (the division of all things into

p: 49

tangible and intangible).

Religion as the social spirit

This point is also not a distinctive feature of religions, for collective life—whether motivated by the need for division of labor among people, kinship through sexual reproduction or racial unity, or the natural demand for their civility—is a salient feature of human life in the sphere of coexistence.

The global nature of the distinctive features of religion

This issue must also be examined, for all religions with divine origins can be generally grouped into two:

First group: It consists of national religions exclusive to limited groups in the history of religion. The prophets of these religions were not the preeminent ones (ūlū’l-‘azm) and were limited to their respective time or group.

Second group: It consists of the world religions like the ones associated with Prophet Ibrahīm (‘a) and whose messengers were the ūlū’l-‘azm, viz. Nūh (Noah), Ibrahīm, Mūsa (Moses), ‘Īsa (Jesus), and Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah (‘a). If it is not so, then the phrase refers to the common features of all religions such as belief in God, eternity, religious duties and rights, and the like.

“The unity of man and nature” and “the unity of man, nature and the spirit of being”

These two phrases have a very broad meaning and are not a salient feature of the phenomenon called ‘religion’. There are philosophers who philosophically acknowledge this unity. Sufis and mystics also believe in this unity and something even higher. They believe that, man, nature, the spirit of the entire universe, and even God are a single being (theory of the unity of being). The stoics and a group of Indian philosophers and mystics believe in this theory. Therefore, these items are not exclusive to religion.

Apprehension, struggle and desire for union (ittisal)

This point is also not free from ambiguity. The possible meanings conceivable are as follows:

- Ardent desire, struggle and aspiration of man to be in union with God are like the union of drops of water and the sea. This possibility is not correct in monotheistic religions, for the Sacred Essence of the

p: 50

Lord is higher than a creature that He created or originated, to be part of His Sacred Essence.

- Endeavor and desire for change in humanity has the potential to be God-like because of divine attributes that exist within the said potential of man. If it means possession of those attributes within the limits of man, this is possible in monotheistic religions.

- Union means entry into the height of attraction to the Lordly Perfection. In this station, the person can become an embodiment of Divine Lights, but never reach the Sublime Lordly Station.

This is the best possible meaning.

Note: The word ‘apprehension’ which implies agitation along the way to perfection is not correct. Instead, ardent desire, serious endeavor and persistence, called kadh (کدح) in Arabic, are more accurate than the terms ‘apprehension’ and mere ‘desire’.

Belief in dominance, progress, exaltation, and movement

In this phrase, the word ‘dominance’ requires explanation. If ‘dominance’ means attainment of power for the organization of the four types of relationship (man’s relationship with himself, God, the universe, and fellow human beings), then it is perfectly correct, and it can be said that the attainment of the lofty goal of religion is to acquire such power. Acquisition of power for the organization of relationship with the self means control and mastership over the self. Through this power, a person could set himself along the path of God-wariness (taqwa) which means maintenance of self-perfection. And through this taqwa he can proceed to the height of attraction to the Sublime Perfection. It also means acquisition of power to organize a relationship with God. Through this power, one can control himself from sin, selfishness and self-centeredness, and undertake the ideal movement. By acquiring power to organize an intellectual, perceptive and interactive relationship with the world of being, he will succeed in self-building.

Emancipation from what exists means emancipation from captivity

If it means disconnection from whatever exists and severance of relationship with whatever is, then it is forbidden in religion. Detachment from the world connection, which is one of the fundamental relationships a person has for his subsistence is actually detachment from the self. Obviously, negation of the self is not the same while pursuing one’s perfection, which emanates

p: 51

from God’s boundless wisdom and favor. The world of being is the passageway for its progress and the Beatific Vision (liqa’ Allah) in eternity is its ultimate goal and objective. It must be borne in mind that to be in the world, which in the words of the Commander of the Faithful (‘a), is a great place of worship for the wary people. It is not the same as the negation and disconnection seen in Buddhism.

The concept of protection and preservation of man, life and society

There can be no meaning for this except protection of man, life and society from pollution, degradation, fall, and backwardness. This point is perfectly correct in religion, but the word ‘concept’ must be omitted, for the salient feature of religion is the protection and preservation and not its concept.

Acquaintance, curiosity and engagement in curiosity

Acquaintance, inquiry and research to increase knowledge about the self, God, the world, and fellow human beings, and the use of knowledge and learning along the path of searching for perfection are essentials of religion.

Beauty and art

The meaning of desire for tangible and intelligible beauties which, in addition to the resultant purification of the soul and preparation of the self to soar from this very high platform to the Absolute, Incomparable Beauty, must be shown in the world to shorten the distance of realizing God for people. Moreover, the meaning of ‘art’ is to undertake artistic intellectual or psychological activities and set purely constructive artistic works at the service of spiritual growth and enhancement of human talents, and not the beauty and art which always exist for all people in various cultures of human society.

Love and worship

Definitely, ‘ishq (love) refers to the highest degree of love, passion and craving for Sublime Perfection, which is the totality of beauty and glory, and it is correct to regard this love as one of the salient features of religion. However, what is called ‘metaphorical love’ or mere love without its attachment to the Sublime Perfection (which is definitely what Sharī‘atī intended to mean) is not part of the salient features of religion, in fact, religion is inimical to it. A person’s expression of ‘virtual love’ will lead to the wastage of all his life’s assets and capital, for

p: 52

عشقهایی کز پی رنگی بود عشق نبود عاقبت ننگی بود

The love for the sake of a color (outward beauty) is not love. Its end is disgrace.(1)

هرچه جز عشق خدای احسن است گر شکر خوارﻱﺳﺖ آن جان کندن است

Everything, besides love of the most beauteous God, is good. Eating sugar is (in truth) agony of spirit.(2)

عاشقان از درد زان نالیدﻩﺍند که نظر تا جایگاه مالیدﻩاند

The reason why lovers moan in grief is because they have rubbed their eyes malapropos.(3)

Meanwhile, worship of God the Glorious, after knowing Him, is the purest essential feature, nay pillar, of religion.

The ideal, ideal man and utopian city

This point can be analyzed under two headings: (1) The ideal means that religion is the ideal goal of human beings. (2) Religion moulds the ideal man. Both propositions are correct. Meanwhile, the ‘utopian city’ (madīneh-ye fa¤ileh) means the use of individuals and groups of society with all their positive potentials in social life. This is obviously the purest feature of religion in the dimension of people’s social life.

Awaiting in protest against the status quo and moving toward the ideal

Taking into account the fundamentals of Sharī‘atī’s school of thought, awaiting (intizar) means wishing for the emergence of the best society and struggling for its realization. Its perfect form will be possible with the advent of the Master of the Age (‘atfs).(4) Of course, it must be borne in mind that

p: 53

intizar is not identical with protest (i‘tira¤) against the status quo. It actually stems from the feeling of disgust and anguish for the undesirable condition which stands in the way of a perfect collective human life.

Meanwhile, protest against the status quo can be interpreted in two ways:

1. Protest against the status quo stems from the lack of divine pleasure in every condition contrary to the ideal human felicity. In view of the high and reformative potential of human beings, it is a common phenomenon that exists in all communities and nations with rational cultures. Even the lack of divine satisfaction for the status quo is one of the strongest elements of forward movement in history.

2. Protest means the lack of divine pleasure for anything that causes degradation, like mankind steeped in ignorance, poverty and human rights violations, and making efforts to change the direction of life’s movement toward its lofty goals and means.

Nature’s self-consciousness

This is reiterating “the unity of man, nature and the spirit of being”. This can also be inferred from the Qur’anic verses that indicate glorification (tasbīh) and prostration (sujud) of the creatures in the world. Of course, in proving the self-consciousness of nature, some thinkers have cited the law of causation.

این جهان کوه است و فعل ما ندا سوی ما آین نداها را صدا

This world is the mountain, and our action the shout / The echo of the shouts comes (back) to us.(1)

Sharī‘atī has not mentioned three very important salient features of religion:

1. The religious laws, rights, duties, and manners as well as worship of the Sublime Origin (God) and belief in the Resurrection (ma‘ad) must be stated more clearly and elaborately to some extent. Most probably, he contented himself with previous statements. However, as demanded by the law on definitions, it would have been better if he had stated the above points more clearly and elaborately.

The ultimate reply to the six fundamental questions on life can only be provided by religion. They are:

p: 54

1. Who am I?

2. From where I have come?

3. Where have I come?

4. With whom am I?

5. Where shall I go?

6. What have I come for?

3. The real felicity lies in virtue and sacrifices in the way of lofty human values, such as, faithfulness to promise and covenant, defense of the truth, responsible freedom, justice, and the like. Without religion, the world is nothing but a place for sport, sleeping and eating. If a person uses all his facilities and potentials in the way of selfishness and self-interest, he will lose miserably.

روزگار و چرخ و انجم سر بسر بازیستی گرنه این روز دراز دهر را فرداستی

The world, fate, and stars, are all your playthings / Otherwise, this long day of fortune is your tomorrow.(1)

3. It pertains to total devotion. Religion comprises something which is beyond mere manifestation; something not stipulated and ultimate; something to which people want to be devoted with utmost sincerity. In other words, it includes not only awareness of anything sublime, but whatever is treated final and whatever requires utmost devotion. Of course, in the words of Ian Ramsey, this devotion most also be total as well as widespread. So, this devotion must be final and universal.

Of course, this understanding is not direct or without mediation. Even in intuitive knowledge (self-consciousness), the “I” perceives his self directly, for the perception of the “I” in intuitive knowledge is not possible without negation of “other than I” quickly, generally or briefly. This is while the perception of God only needs intention. This is the meaning of what Geisler said, “That which is sublime is beyond ones experience (mujarrabat).” And in the jargon of Western philosophers, it is a priori upon which the philosophy of Kant, in particular, relies.

He said, “Religion comprises of something which is beyond mere manifestation; something not stipulated and ultimate; something to which people want to be devoted with utmost sincerity.” This point is also very fine because in religion familiarity, information and acquaintance with God is not sufficient. Instead, as the very knowledge about that Sacred Being is attained, ardent desire for ‘searching’ in order to obtain His Lordly attraction begins.

In the expression of Ian Ramsey, this devotion most also be total as well as widespread. It is because delight and pleasure from knowing the world is different from devotion to it. That which exists in religion is the former and not the latter. That is, it is delight caused by the fact that the universe has been created according to the lofty wisdom and will of God and witnessing the celestial splendor of the universe impels a person to pay ultimate devotion to God, and not just submit to the universe and surrender himself to it. A majestic element of the universe or one of the lofty aspects of this universe gives rise to devotion to the Creator. Man is not supposed to surrender to the universe. Instead, with utmost cheer and confidence, he must consider it a springboard for his own spiritual flight.

به جهان خرم از آنم که جهان خرم ازوست / عاشقم بر همه عالم که همه عالم ازوست

I belong to the pleasant world as the pleasant world is from Him. / I am in love with the entire world as the entire world is from Him.(1)

p: 57

p: 58

refinement. For example, in reply to Dhu‘lab al-Yamanī, who asked him, “Have you seen your Lord?” the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) said,

لَمْ أَعْبُدْ رَباًّ لَمْ أَرَهُ.

“I do not worship a Lord whom I cannot see [with the eye of my heart].”

Spencer’s definition is a product of the average level of understanding, because he has to distinguish between plunging into noble perplexity, which is beyond the majesty of the world of being for the progressive men of learning, and immersing into the ocean of secrets in which he cannot find anything except darkness.

It is not clear what he means by “the presence of something absolute”. Does it mean the presence of man before God? Does it mean His presence in the universe? Does it mean His presence in human hearts?

This definition does not explain why the said ‘absolute’ is beyond investigation. Obviously, most men of learning of the East and West have conducted an investigation of the said Absolute Truth by studying the law of causation, order, sense of complaint, intrinsic perception, sense of noble duty, proof of necessity and perfection, existential evidence, discovery of the secrets of nature, knowing the self, and the like. Of course, because of the limitations of human potential and faculties of perception, this investigation does not reach His Essence.

‘The absolute that is beyond investigation’ certainly refers to God, whereas intellectually, the existence of God and His Attributes can be understood and perceived through inward witnessing (shuhūd-e durūnī). I wish Western thinkers would acknowledge that they live in a world in which their knowledge and insight can never penetrate the real essence of things. Yet, through the same common knowledge and insight, they can acquire hundreds of thousands of facts in all aspects of their lives and through the advancements they have achieved, they can lead a life free of agitation. Proofs of this claim follow: (1) in a set of compound items whose parts are related to one another, the existence of an unknown part is enough to falsify any claim of knowledge about the other parts; (2) it is impossible to distinguish the effects of perceptive elements on perceived things ‘as it is’ is scientifically set. Obviously, the effect of perceptive elements in perceiving a thing, apart from reaching it, is zero degree.

p: 60

world, and his fellow human beings) that can answer the fundamental questions of man, such as the following: Who am I? Where have I come from? Where shall I go? Similarly, religion makes use of pieces of knowledge supported by scientific observations; for example, in proving the existence of God, one can utilize scientific propositions.

According to the above definition, religion means reflection on something beyond knowledge and thinking. Those who believe in this definition of religion barely see the earth from a long distance and express their view about the nature of the earth and the millions of millions of creatures living in it, saying, “This is it and nothing else.”

An important pillar of religion is belief in supernatural truths, but religion itself is not metaphysical in nature, for religion manifests itself in psychological states, actions, speeches, worldly life and acts of worship, in a physical form. Similarly, prosperity and excellence, products of religiosity are manifest in this very world just as they will be realized in the eternal world. Can it be said that the following truths which are an outcome of religion—peace of mind, inner delight, and adherence to the laws and principles prescribed in this world for the wholesome life of people are metaphysical?

What is stated in defining the nature of religion is belief in God, a metaphysical truth as well as belief in other metaphysical truths such as the angels, souls, revelation, Resurrection, eternity and general responsibility.

Religion does not deal only with beings and things which are beyond the limit of our knowledge, for the most majestic metaphysical truth is God, and through inner purification, and by acting upon the lofty principles which activate his God-seeking disposition, a person can perfectly sense the ray of the Divine Light, as did the Commander of the Faithful ‘Alī (‘a), who said:

لَمْ أَعْبُدْ رَباًّ لَمْ أَرَهُ.

“I do not worship a Lord whom I cannot see [with the eye of my heart].”

We have not seen the essence of beauty but we can observe its various manifestations, for the flower is a manifestation of beauty but not its essence. A sweet voice is beautful. A waterfall, moonlight, good penmanship, a human face, and thousands of other beautiful phenomena are all manifestations of beauty. We can definitely perceive within ourselves the

p: 62

overall essence of beauty whereas it has no distinctive features of any of the beautiful manifestations and is different from the general concept deduced from the said distinctive features. The general concept of man is discerned from what can be deduced from the salient features of individuals like Hasan, Hamīd, Kazim and the like. This is because the general concept of man can be corroborated with all human beings as perfect samples. However, beauty as a general concept cannot be corroborated with its different manifestations. In a nutshell, God is perceivable to us just as the absolute essence of beauty, justice, and wisdom is. The following questions must be posed to those who believe in the following lines about religion—“According to this definition, religion means reflection about something beyond our knowledge and thinking,” “It is unknowable” and “It is incomprehensible”:

1. Are general perceptions of the world in philosophies gained through knowledge and thinking? Of course, but it is not because the facts acquired are similar to each other. Most perceptions of the world are based upon intellectual taste, supposition and intuition and thus, widely different.

2. Are discoveries and inventions in science the result of knowledge and thinking? No, because irrespective of their important contribution, it is clear that the most fundamental factors are intuition and inspiration.

3. Can all the socio-religious revolutions throughout history, and all the sacrifices in the way of truth, freedom and justice with religious motives be considered imagination or illusion?

4. Does religiously motivated endurance of all hardships, a serious struggle against selfishness, and the pursuit of truth stem from the pursuit of the unknowable? Obviously, the reply to such questions is negative.

sublime way:

عدم آیینه عالم عکس و انسان چو چشم عکس در وی شخص پنهان

تو چشم عکسی و او نور دیده است به دیده دیده را هرگز که دیده است

جهان انسان شد و انسان جهانی از این پاکیزه تر نبود بیانی

Absent is the mirror, and the universe is like a reflection. / Someone is hidden in it, like the eye of the reflection.

You are the eye of the reflection, and He is the light of the eyes; / Who has ever seen that true light with his eyes?

Indeed, man becomes the universe, and the universe becomes man. / Can it be expressed in a way better than this?(1)

3. In the couplets of Shabistarī, the word ‘He’ or ‘Him’ refers to God. Therefore, the concept of God is discussed as an essential truth in the notion of “man’s union with the universe”, whereas in the definition of Ellis, God does not exist at all.

4. If we want to give an essential speculative interpretation of the definition of Ellis, we must say that he is a person of existential unity.

which there is no way.” The reply and criticism for this phrase has already been given in the previous definitions.

Thirdly, sensory perception means the transfer of the perceptible (mahsūsat) to the human mind and they are reflected in the mind as nothing but specific details; otherwise, mirror and limpid water which also reflect forms and shapes of bodies must possess knowledge. We must accept the existence of a force called mental abstraction or separation of general matters to deduce general laws in the form of knowledge. Thus, sensory perception cannot be regarded as the only source of human knowledge.

D'Holbach believes that since phenomena were explained before by means of religion, now they must be interpreted by means of science. That is, according to him, religion was the source of explaining things before and now it is science. Granted that in some primitive religions in the past, people used to interpret things in the world by the help of religion, this does not mean that all religions interpret the universe from a devotional perspective. We can see that Islam has taken science as one of its basic elements. For this reason, during the Middle Ages, Islam rescued science from extinction, to say the least. Both science and religion have their own specific functions and one cannot replace the other, for religion is rooted in man’s inner being, and thus, it cannot be set aside. How we wish D'Holbach and his likes had also acquired information about Muslim societies and seen how Islam and the nations following it give foremost value to knowledge from the beginning of its spread, and how they saved science from extinction during the Middle Ages (third and fourth centuries AH).

By saying that science must replace religion, D'Holbach is like one who says that the eye must replace the head and feet. His view about Christianity as a superstition propagated by priests must be closely examined. Do D'Holbach and his likes possess academic honesty? If they did, why did they not declare that apart from the practices in the name of Christianity, there are other realities and currents such as those of Islam? Under the pretext of their perceptions of Christianity and its leading figures, why did they implicate other religions?

well as, the multidimensional aspects of different phenomena. Take for example the case of an animal statue in a cave or mountain while a human statue or some human statues standing looking at it. The purpose behind standing or looking is not hidden or spiritual and can be caused by different factors. So, by just observing that setup we cannot be absolutely certain about their real motive. For instance, are they merely looking at the animal? Are these people familiar with this animal? Do they consider it an intermediary between them and the metaphysical? Thus, by mere observance of phenomena and various events in history, one cannot be certain about the specific motives behind its occurrence in a particular community or nation.

2. On which basis did Otto formulate these concepts? Is his basis inalterable or alterable? Is it regional or local? Is it global or regional?

3. Taking into account the fundamental principles of religions, religion cannot exist without the belief in God and acceptance of responsibility in life and a set of other religious principles. If we consider the concept of sacredness in the above definition, [we can realize that] its requisite is belief in the Absolute, and this is contradictory to Rudolf Otto’s definition of religion.

1. The universe is real and its coming into existence is real as well. So, the universe is a not mental construct and it has come into existence by the ultimate wisdom of God.

2. The creator of this universe is God who is One and Unique.

3. God has all the Attributes of Perfection of the highest order, such as knowledge, power, wisdom, forgiveness, justice, authority, absolute sovereignty over the universe, absolute self-sufficiency, supervision of the universe, preservation of the laws governing the universe, love for the creatures, and the like.

4. God has created mankind for a sublime purpose, and that is union with the Lordly Attraction.

5. One must live according to the rational principles and laws of God, whether in the realm of ‘what is’ or ‘what should be’.

6. Every human being, provided that he or she has not fallen from the level of human nobility and honor due to pollution, treachery and crime, is like any other human being, a single soul in the sight of God.

7. One separated from knowledge and learning—although it is possible for him to acquire them—is deprived of the honor of freewill.

8. In order to know the totality of his being, one must have a relationship with oneself, God, the universe, and fellow human beings. Similarly, in order to know the ‘musts’ and ‘ought-to-be’s’ of rational life, one must refer to revelation. To be more precise, the ultimate bases of all these things are ontological revelation and legislative revelation.

9. The Resurrection and eternal life are real. An addition rational proof of this point is the following:

روزگار و چرخ و انجم سر بسر بازیستی

گرنه این روز دراز دهر را فرداستی

The world, fate and stars are all your playthings

Otherwise, this long day of fortune is your tomorrow.(1)

That is, negation of God, the Resurrection and eternal life necessitates negation of all the ‘musts’ and ‘maybes’ of life as well as negation of moral

p: 71

and cultural rules vis-à-vis selfishness and self-interest.

10. Human growth and development know no limit. Through utmost efforts and struggle in organizing the four types of relationship with himself, God, the universe, and fellow human beings, and preparing the theoretical and practical answers to the six main questions (Who am I? Where have I come from? Where have I come to? Where am I going? What have I come for? Who is with me? ), one can reach far beyond himself and under the radiance of the Lordly Attraction according to the noble verse,

﴿إِنَّا لِلّهِ وَإِنَّ-ا إِلَیْهِ رَاجِعونَ﴾

“Indeed we belong to Allah, and to Him will we indeed return.”(1)

Is such an original case symbolic or metaphorical in nature?

greatness in this life. It is stated in the following quatrain:

چندان برو این ره که دویی برخیزد

Such expressions of mystics are always accompanied by the term ‘heated iron’ (al-hadīdah al-muhammat). Because of its contact with the fire, the iron becomes reddish, acquiring the color of the fire although its essence remains the same. Mawlawī(1) says,

صبغة الله هست خم رنگ هو پیسها یک رنگ گردد اندرو

چون در آن خم افتد و گوییش قم از طرب گوید منم خم لا تلم

آن منم خم خود انا الحق گفتنست رنگ آتش دارد الا آهنست

رنگ آهن محو رنگ آتشست ز آتشی می لافد و خامش وشست

چون بسرخی گشت همچون زر کان پس انا النارست لافش بی زبان

The baptism of Allah is the dyeing-vat of the Absolute God: therein (all) piebald things become of one color.

When he (the mystic) falls into the vat, and you say to him, “Arise,” he says in rapture, “I am the vat: do not blame (me).”

That “I am the vat” is the (same as) saying “I am God”: he has the color of the fire, albeit he is iron.

The color of the iron is naughted in the color of the fire: it (the iron) boasts of (its) fieriness, though (actually) it is like one who keeps silent.(2)

Third possibility: gradual perfection of the self and preparation for union and stay in the Lordly Attraction which cannot be imagined and discerned by the self-conscious mind except through momentary flashes in this world. As stated in religious sources and indicated by Ibn Sīna, the outcome of attainment of this ideal can be understood and realized after [experiencing] separation of the soul from the body. Ibn Sīna thus says,

And be it known that these occupations (while living), as you know, are reactions and difficulties within the soul which are in constant contact with the body. And if these passions and phenomena are established in the human soul after the soul’s separation from the body just as they are established in the soul in the course of life, they will remain fixed with the difference that in the state of living the soul was busy administering the body. So, the resultant pain and joy cannot be felt but after the separation from the body, the soul is no more preoccupied and it comes to itself, sensing all those things…(1)

psychological and philosophical inclinations coincide to explain religious life. He describes religious phenomena, and presents a philosophical analysis of the importance of these phenomena.(1)

3. Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking (1907): This work contains a theory about the truth mixed with his functionalist psychology.(2)

In Pragmatism, James finds a way to unite science and religion saying, the touchstone of all truths is experience and the religious experience of every person is a phenomenon that must undoubtedly be accepted as a reality. These ideas led him to pluralism in the personal and moral sense but not in the metaphysical sense.

According to pragmatism, the touchstone of every belief is the nature of change that it brings to one’s personal life.(3)

2. His Definition of Religion

1. The variety in the definitions of religion shows that the word ‘religion’ does not refer to the single subject or something specific or determined. It is rather general in nature and refers to a set of things.

2. From the outset, we must declare that we will not reach a point of finding out the essence of religion but rather obtain its features and effects according to status.

I can explain an aspect of ‘religion’, but cannot find a categorical definition of religion that is acceptable to both friend and foe. Thus, religion refers to the effects feelings and happenings that take place in a person in his inner world, distant from all attachments, making him realize the connection between him and that which he calls ‘God’. In this definition, religion is referred to as ‘religious experience’.

With this definition of religion we do not have many ideological differences.

p: 78

Possibly, there is difference on only one subject and that is on the term ‘divine matter’.

Therefore, religion refers to ‘human reaction to a set of things’—reaction which generally happens in the life of a person (in contrast to temporary reaction).

According to history, our war with such-and-such nation happened at such-and-such period whose causes based on sensory observations were not mentioned so we cannot point them out as the cause of war. Let us assume that we went along with war experts, and we used every means possible in order to identify the causes of war and we did not find out anything except individual corpses and mass graves, remnants of war equipment and weapons, and other physical manifestations of war. Obviously, through these observations alone we could not understand the cause or motives of the said war—economic, territorial disputes, revenge, selfishness, or world conquest.

For this reason, we argue that our etiological knowledge of such wars does not go beyond guess and probability. In order to arrive at a definition of religion which is comprehensive and inclusive to a considerable extent, we have no option but to consider the two basic realms, inner and outer.

One is the inner reality which religious people accept whether through intellection (ta‘aqqul) or intuition (shuhūd), and interpret and make sense of their lives through the motives behind that reality.

The other is the outer reality such as acts of worship, discharging of duties and rights. These appear in the external world due to inward motives.

Let us consider the realities and activities in the inner world of religious people. Among them are traces of sound mind, innate nature (fitrah) and pure conscience (wijdan); the purposefulness of the universe, existence of God who is the Creator, eternal life, and pressing need for God and His will.

3. Peace of mind, which emanates from [the belief in] the purposefulness of the universe and its order

4. Taking life seriously and purposefully

5. Acceptance of general values, such as moral legislative principles essential for removing defects and supplementing merits in life.

6. Preparing convincing answers to the six questions (1. Who am I? Where I have come from? Where have I come? With who am I? Where shall I go? What have I come for?)

7. The general essence of the acts of worship is to establish contact with God the Glorious, and to be in His Axis

8. Sacrifice and selflessness based upon the legislative will (iradeh-ye tashrī‘ī) of God in fighting against oppression, ignorance, poverty, and

p: 80

violation of the rights of the weak

9. Acceptance of the unity of mankind by citing the bases of this unity, such as the unity of their Creator (God), the unity of goal pursued by everybody, the unity of the natural essence of their origin, i.e. dust, the unity of the Origin of their soul, and other common elements.

10. Sufferings and hardships do not bring about inner imbalance, pessimism and mental agitation to religious people.

11. With a lofty goal in life along the path of “We belong to God and to Him we shall return,” the religious person thinks of himself in the presence of God.

12. One of the significant features of religion is that the religious person regards all occupations in life as a form of worship as movement towards the said direction (“We belong to God and to Him we shall return”). A worker who is busy producing a product in a farm or factory is busy in worship with that sense of movement. Every pupil, student, scholar, or anyone who is engaged in an intellectual pursuit to establish connection with realities and set them for the use of people in material and spiritual life from the most basic level up to the highest, is in a state of worship. Therefore, places of worship that are built for establishing connection with God are meant for worship and direct communion with God, and not that the place for worship is limited to them.

13. The religious person regards as trust every distinction he or she acquires—from material things to the loftiest spiritual matters—as well as power he or she earns, that must all be utilized for the material and spiritual welfare of humanity.

14. For the religious person, knowledge is the brightest lamp at his or her disposal for the discovery of realities and he or she must try his or her best to make this lamp as bright as possible.

15. From the religious perspective, art along the path of ‘rational life’ is one of the most sublime means in life.

16. Management or leadership in Islam means administration of a set of members organized for the movement toward material and spiritual felicity, and the manager or leader is like a physically perfect or complete person who is in charge of managing his or her limbs, faculties and natural potential.

p: 81

17. Apart from religion, no school of thought or way of thinking has been able to formulate the ultimate step and real factor to regulate man’s selfishness, which has drowned his account in tears and blood. Only faith and acknowledgment of God and acting upon His commands are effective in curing this fatal disease (selfishness), and nothing else.

18. Most constructive movements in history have required a collective action and sacrifices are consciously religious, or as stimulated by programs that promised ‘absolute’ things to people and indirectly incited them, such as the absolute concepts of felicity (sa‘adah), humanity (insaniyyah), justice (‘adl), freedom (hurriyyah), and even homeland (watan). If one had no expectation to attain the absolute, he would not have offered his life for them.

The third refers to the phenomena and events that happen in the world as motivated by religion. Such phenomena and events can be classified as follows:

Buildings: This type of phenomena in itself has different kinds:

1. Places of worship like mosques, churches, synagogues, Hindu and Buddhist temples, Zoroastrian temples, and the like: These buildings, built with the salient features they have, proves that their construction has been motivated by religious inclination. Since the earliest days of human life on earth, places of worship have been built having distinct features, it will not be a mistake to understand that they have been built for worship and express religious tendencies.

2. Structures whose religious motive has been identified by means of special inscriptions and sketches on them. Since time immemorial up to now, there have been a lot of hospitals, water reservoirs, bridges, and other structures in which the religious motives of those who built them have been clearly recorded in their respective epigraphs or in handwritten works such as deeds of endowment and testaments. For example, the deed of endowment of Sultan Qalawun(1) Hospital in which this line has been written: “This hospital has been built by Malik Mansūr Sayf al-Dīn Sultan Qalawun, sincerely for the sake of Allah.”(2)

p: 82

Special acts performed as a form of worship for the sake of seeking nearness to God. Because of the special importance given by people to religion throughout history, history has recorded the quality and quantity of most devotional acts performed with the intention of seeking nearness to God. Nowadays, through essential research, the quality and quantity of devotional acts performed by different religious societies can be examined. The main goal of man’s inclination to religion is to meet his being’s innate needs and set himself in the axis of Divine Perfection. For these needs, he strives hard in both the inner and outer realms.

Yet, James said, “Thus, religion refers to the effects, feelings and happenings that take place in a person in his inner world distant from all attachments such that he realizes that there is a connection between him and that which he calls ‘God’.” The attainment of the said connection and those effects and feelings are something common to every religious person. As such, it cannot be asserted that religion is something personal.

what is possible through pure empirical knowledge.(1)

2. Religion

Jung talked more about religion as “undoubtedly the superior and most universal expression of the human soul.”(2) In the 19 volumes of the collection of his works, it is rare to find a treatise not dealing with issues related to religion. Among his works on religion are the following:

Memories, Dreams, Reflections(3) (1965): it is regarded as his religious testament showing contrasting portraits of him: religious experiences full of love for God and serious criticism of the deities and the church.

Psychology and Religion (1938): it is a collection of his speeches about the relationship of scientific psychology and religion.

Paracelsica (1942): in this book, he deals with alchemy, psychology and religion.(4)

Psychology and Alchemy (1944): it contains his reconstruction of Christian thought and a new reading of the principles of belief in the Lord’s Supper.

Answer to Job (1952): It is a famous work containing Jung’s contradictory statements on a theological issue.

Four Imaginal Forms (?): In this work, Jung discussed four possible figures; he examined motherhood, rebirth, soul, and guile. He allocated the third part to an analysis of Sūrat al-Kahf of the Noble Qur’an.

3. His Definition of Religion

Jung said, “Before I talk about religion, it is necessary for me to explain first the meaning of this term which I believe is consistent with its root word in Latin religere, meaning reflection by the conscience with total attention. It is what Otto duly called ‘sacred and luminous thing’.

p: 84

Therefore, religion means a state of watchfulness, remembrance and close attention to powerful elements to which man attributes overwhelming power and idealistically portrays them as spirits, devils, gods, laws, or imaginal forms (ancient figures).(1)

In fact, the term ‘religion’ signifies a particular state of the conscience, which changes due to the perception of the quality of sanctity and luminosity.(2)

from treating poetry and mythology as the foundation of religion.

Secondly, just because the religious beliefs of some primitive people relied upon mythology and poetry (something which is not yet proven), this does not prove that the religious beliefs and practices of so many people, with thousands of profound scholars, sages and thinkers that founded civilizations, are based upon poetry and mythology. Should we regard the religious beliefs and practices of Avicennas, Farabīs,(1) Averroeses,(2) Bīrūnīs,(3) Ibn Khaldūns,(4) Rūmīs,(5) Mulla Sadras,(6) Mīr Damads,(7) and the like from the East to West, as relying upon myths and poetry?

The argument of Herder is similar to the argument that the ancient Greek

p: 86

theory on the body elements constituting water, fire, soil, and air, and the theories of great contemporary physicists on the extraordinarily basic foundations of nature, such as the studies on quantum mechanics, as being one and the same!

Secondly, let us assume that religion inwardly and personally ends up in mythology and poetry (pleasant feelings based upon selection and elimination in the realities of the world). Is the relation of perfectly divine religion to mythology and poetry more logical, or the relation of multidimensional perfect man to unicellular organisms?

You cannot biologically, physiologically, psychologically and mentally find the position of progressive human beings of today by taking hundreds of wonderfully potent unicellular organisms. In the same manner, you cannot find a unicellular organism with a religious spirit like faith, which can attract the attention of the world with the extraordinary potential it has. Can you witness the aesthetic aptitude, which sees a thousand types of beauty in a single reality, in a unicellular organism?

proving the necessity of people’s attachment to this absolute. Then he has achieved collective action.

Second: this thinker has limited himself in defining religion by stating the motive of religion as a feeling of attachment to God, without mentioning anything about other aspects of the definition.

man is an inebriated ape of God.

there any observed phenomenon or gesture of apes, which indicates this desire to become ‘God’?

4. Was the constant pursuit of sublime perfection by the martyrs, who offered their lives, selfish insinuations?

How we wish the likes of Rainach would have spent a day studying the record of Islam and then attempted to define religion.

means God).

Such a definition is like saying, if defining science, that science means the relationship between the discovery and the realities! Just as this meaning does not give any clear definition of science, so does such a definition of religion.

ای دل ار سیل فنا بنیاد هستی برکند چون تو را نوح است کشتیبان ز طوفان غم مخور(1)

سعدیا گر بکند سیل فنا خانهٔ عمر دل قوی دار که بنیاد بقا محکم ازوست(2)

در غم ما روزها با روزها پاک نیست(3)

Second point: in order to assess Freud’s definition of religion a general view of his motives and ways of reasoning are of immense importance. Freud does not give importance and credence to personality and its defense against sexual instinct’s force and activities, but interprets all human aspects on the basis of this instinct; its suppression or indulgence! After reaching the pinnacle of popularity and acquiring a sort of religious sanctity by the use of the label ‘Freudism’, he turned responsive capability to incapability. However, the weakness of this theory became known to all and sundry, and apart from classifying what is ‘conscious’, ‘unconscious’, and ‘semi-conscious’, which was a plausible pretext, the themes of this school were subject to serious criticism. Apart from this, which in itself has a long story, there is an extremely worthwhile issue about him. He demolished the foundations of all his theories about moral and religious questions.

His expression is as follows: “I always find myself annoyed by raising non-weighable (indescribable) issues and I always acknowledge this annoyance!”(4) Having an allergy for moral issues and meta-quantity truths, can one rely on his definition of religion? Or, can one consider his negative views about religion and other sublime meta-quantity human values as having any scientific value?

Third point: the definition given by Freud for religion—“religion signifies man’s struggle to find heavenly consolations to help him overcome frightening events in life”—states only one benefit of religion, i.e. strength to deal with frightening events, and not the main goal or purpose of religion. For Freud, there is no room at all for spiritual delight and sense of solidarity with other human beings through religion, because he was afraid of raising non-weighable issues! For Freud, there is no room for any constructive services that man has rendered motivated by religion for freedom, justice

p: 94

and realization of human rights throughout history, for raising non-weighable issues would annoy him!

definitions, three main definitions shall be considered:

The problem with Durkheim is that he regards the Sacred Being, i.e. God, as a social principle, believing that the society is the cause of man’s inclination to God. That is, he believes that society generates the belief in something sacred, belief in God. In other words, Durkheim does not give any credence to the individual; he gives all credence to society and no identity for the individual, whereas, it is not so. Man has his own potential and society can only be the agent of his growth or diminution.

The theory of Durkheim takes the influence in society to an extreme. It is not farfetched to say that his theory considerably contributes to the statement, “Man has history and has no institution”, which writers, like Sartre, feed to the common people. Durkheim has confused expedient effect with causative effect. As a final point, he must address the negation of an individual’s distinct identity, potential, and problems, such as the following:

1. How to explain revolutions, that have frequented history, and why they are contrary to the natural course of societies (otherwise, they would not be labeled ‘revolution’)?

2. The basic human sense of freewill and responsibility is nothing but an illusion according to Durkheim’s theory. To assume that the individual is constructed by its own society means that he must compulsorily accept the fatalistic construction of society.

3. How to interpret the discoveries and inventions presented for the first time in society, considering the incapability of society in bringing them into existence and even in determining most of them?

advanced form, most religions claim to be the ultimate truth in close harmony with the ultimate reality. Definitely, religion does not claim that it is purely a rational understanding of reality. Thinking may possibly be for a secondary feeling or intention as most religious teachers would evaluate. To be more precise, religion entails reflection on the meaning of the world for a better human existence. Religion entails taking into account the possibility that something at the center of reality responds to and satisfies man’s needs in life and realizes his destiny.

5. Religious perception is a kind of spiritual exhilaration and not mere rational understanding of the reality or a perception of it. Thus, thinking can be a prelude to a secondary feeling.

6. “Religion entails reflection on the meaning of the world for a better human existence.” Of course, Feaver should have also added the element of acting upon and searching for “a better human existence”, because mere reflection does not include ‘searching’, which is the goal of religion.

7. “Religion entails taking into account this possibility that something at the center of reality responds to and satisfies man’s needs in life and for the realization of his destiny.”

The statement above must be modified in this way: “Religion entails the necessity of accepting the truth that there is something at the center of reality that responds to and satisfies the needs of man for life and realizes his destiny.” At any rate, this definition has mentioned numerous dimensions of religion and has plus points compared to the previous definitions.

p: 100

religion.

fundamental concept of religion is a state derived from an ultimate desire, an infinite rapture, which a person unconditionally takes seriously and is willing to suffer and even die for it. Ultimate desire has both an objective and subjective dimension. The subjective dimension denotes that the individual is unconditionally serious about that thing. The objective dimension is indicative of the objectivity of the ultimate desire, which Tillich called ‘God’. In other words, ‘ultimate devotion’ is ‘worship’, and in this sense, worship is an expression of admiration of something sublime, of which man is conscious.

combination of ethics and theology constitutes religion.(1)

unjustifiable. Moreover, abiding by them for perfection, and providing essential services to fellow human beings by setting aside pleasures, and even acts of sacrifice, will be considered a sort of foolishness.

1. The sense of astonishment at the amazing order in the universe. is nothing but imagination without acknowledgment of God who has brought it into being. These proofs show the need to profess religion in this life, but which religion is what must be investigated.

of religion:

1. Emotional factor: belief in a Force or forces that control man’s fate, and the respect accorded to material and spiritual values needed by people, are a product of this conviction.

2. Factor related to feelings: feeling of attachment to this Force or forces in various ways.

3. Element of acceptance: religion deals with actions and acceptance; for example, performing ritual prayers and acknowledging moral laws.

4. Social factor: religion deals with social problems through whose domain the people collectively act to acquire the values offered by religion.

p: 108

p: 110

beliefs are held by a sound intellect and intrinsic perception, free from blind imitation.

2) A program of action termed ‘laws’ and ‘duties’. These two pillars are based upon two things:

1. Moral code: Laws which are ordained for the attainment of virtues, refinement of the soul and inner purification. Due to the innate and universal nature of virtues and values, most of these laws are intrinsic and not extrinsic.

2. Juristic laws, which can be classified into two:

A) Primary laws: Primary laws are based upon the fixed needs of human beings, and can never be changed or modified except in emergency cases and change of subject. For example, the compulsoriness of specific acts of worship, and organizing individual and social life economically, culturally and legally; the prohibition of killing, adultery and fornication, debauchery, breach of contract, and treachery. In reality, these laws are indicative of the fixed nature of man and the nature of the four types of relationship: with himself, with God, with the universe, and with fellow human beings.

B) Secondary laws: These laws shall be prescribed, as needs of individual or social life arise, and are based upon secondary causes and motives. In such cases, the ruler (hakim) prescribes laws to address those needs. If those needs are removed, those laws shall also be abrogated. Since the issuance of the secondary laws is also based upon legal needs, these laws shall be also be considered conditional and the changes in them related to a certain case.

In order to complete the program of action for the attainment of the goal, it is necessary to pay attention to this point: since God the Exalted, determines the subjects, dos and don’ts in relation to individual and social life. Thus, Islamic laws are prescribed on the basis of the same specified laws; for example, the importance of farming for the community, makes it obligatory. However, in some cases, the identity of the subjects is specified by the primary Islamic sources; for example, the ritual prayer (salat) whose actions and recitations are determined by the Islamic sources; wet nursing (ir¤a‘) which renders unlawful the marriage to a wet sister or a wet brother; the amount of kurr(1) water, and the like.(2)

p: 112

Now, in view of the definition we have given to life and religion, we can briefly enumerate the causes of the need for religion in human life, as follows:

1. The definition we have given to ‘rational life’ cannot be realized without professing religion.

2. It is impossible to give an ultimate answer to the most basic questions in life: (1) Who am I? (2) Where have I come from? (3) Where have I come? (4) Who am I with? (5) Where shall I go? (6) What have I come for? Religion can, which states, “Indeed we belong to Allah, and to Him do we indeed return,”(1)

3. If man does not need religion, no virtue and value can be affirmed.

4. No one and no school of thought is capable of answering the might-is-right and survival-of-the-fittest school, which holds that life is only meant for the powerful, without relying on religion.

5. Disregarding religion in life brings about the extinction of man’s feelings of awe on the magnificence of the universe—a feeling which, if not based upon a Wisdom and Will above this world, is meaningless.

6. It is impossible to give an ultimate and profound interpretation of the perceptible and rational beauties without religion.

7. Religion intensifies a pure, sublime sense of duty and maintains it. This sublime duty is different from the rules needed for man’s natural life and establishment of order. Without this pure feeling, man will be reduced into a robot, devoid of any intelligence.

Second point: Every person is supposed clarify the reason behind the need for religion in keeping with his knowledge of himself and the things around him. Since religion is for everybody and not exclusive only for the researchers or a specific class, it follows that it is also for everybody to examine the reason behind the need for religion.

p: 113

However, questioning a person who has no knowledge of religion at all about the reason behind the need for religion is a question about something unknown. By merely having a little knowledge about himself and the universe, it is possible for a person to entertain this question: “With my ideas, beliefs and usual skills I must have for the natural life, should I have other ideas, beliefs and activities in the name of religion?” This is the first degree of knowledge that prompts a person to ask about the reason behind the need for religion. As one’s knowledge about himself, God, the universe, and society increases, the question about religion and the need for it gets more serious. However, when skepticism or a sort of selfishness intoxicates him he loses interest in concluding his knowledge.

Third point: The most fundamental questions in life are raised by the natural disposition (fitrah) and sound intellect, and not by a particular hypothetical intellect. If we consider these two important faculties as factors for religion—without considering the fact religion has emphasized the two and their components—the question about the reason behind the need for religion is outside religion. It has not emanated from religion or religious texts. As such, the answer to be given to it by reason must also be taken outside religion, otherwise it would be [a fallacy of] begging the question (petitio principi).(1)

However, if we consider the natural disposition, sound intellect and their components as things religion has emphasized and called upon, it follows that the question on the reason behind the need for religion as well as the affirmative answer to it will be regarded as things within religion. We believe that considering the need to pay attention to and act upon the demand of ones natural disposition and sound intellect, we prove the need for professing religion, and the reason behind the need for religion is one of the basic foundations of religion and the proof, taken from the two faculties, is intrinsic (dhatī). In this regard, two points are worth mentioning:

1. In our view, not only should those individuals, who have not yet chosen their religion, question the reason behind the need for religion. In fact, the faithful and the religious can also ask the same, and to do so is not

p: 114

contradictory to devotion and religiosity, but is also regarded as one of the foundations of religion, because it is based upon axiomatic and independent laws of the natural disposition and intellect.

2. This question is a perpetual one because human education is incapable of achieving human perfection at once.

We also consider incessant questioning about important cases of the rational life as extremely useful, nay essential. This is because a profound understanding is something essential for a discernible, justifiable and purposeful life. Relying on predecessors’ beliefs and established proofs, has no capability of discerning and justifying a purposeful life. For this reason, all Shī‘ah philosophers, theologians, jurists, and exegetes maintain that belief in the principles of religion (usūl al-dīn) must be based upon reasoning and not imitation except for those who are incapable of reasoning and thinking.

Fourth point: in order to elucidate the reason behind the need for religion, one can use the empirical, deductive and intuitive methods (scientific, philosophical and mystical methods), but the realities in which movement is possible and can be followed through experiment, evidence, reasoning, unraveling, and intuition need attention. Here we shall point out some of these realities as examples:

1. It is important to purge one’s mind of influences that hinder the activity of the natural disposition, conscience and sound intellect. It is through this purging that man will become ready to perceive the truth, whether this truth is related to religion or not.

2. Since inclination to religion in ingrained in man’s being, by considering his quest for perfection and the ultimate goal of life, one must strive to prove the above point through rational proofs and pure perceptions of the conscience.

3. We can prove the existing order and harmony in the realms of man and the world though scientific laws.

4. We can prove the interdependence of the components of creation: such interdependence affirms their relationship to an independent and self-governing Truth. This matter is a rational rule:

هرچه عارض باشد آن را جوهری باید نخست

p: 115

عقل بر این دعوی ما شاهد گویاستی

5. A sublime sense of the conscience; that is, this feeling:

روزگار و چرخ و انجم سر بسر بازیستی

گرنه این روز دراز دهر را فرداستی

The world, fate and stars are all your playthings

Otherwise, this long day of fortune is your tomorrow.(1)

If there is really no Origin (mabda’) and Resurrection (ma‘ad), then not only are fate, stars, virtues, and values nothing but playthings of the natural-animalistic life, but this would also be a place of struggle for survival, and mastery of the powerful, in which one would not officially recognize anyone except himself. If there is really no Origin and Resurrection, all the sacrifices of the noble and pure-hearted for the sake of rendering service to human beings, whose existence has been willed by God, would become futile and useless. If there is really no Origin and Resurrection, to die for the sake of defending human rights and to refrain from sensual pleasures would be sheer folly.

There has been no wholesome and deep-rooted factor throughout history like religion, which provides peace of mind to people.

It is not distorted, or infused with absolute concepts, which are practically unfeasible in the context of natural life.

Sublime witnessing is a kind of lofty effulgence in the world, which cannot be attained except through the extension of the human “I” to the universe. This is the same intuition, which is possessed not only by mystics (‘urafa) but also by great scholars.

Fifth point: Is man an afflicted and indigent being, and can only religion remove this affliction and indigence? Is there another formula that can play the role of religion? Discussing the cause and need for religion, we have pointed out the answer to this question. We shall now examine it more specifically.

In reply to the first part of the question, it must be stated that man is not afflicted but has lost something he must find. Definitely, this truth, whatever

p: 116

is its name, must have the answer to his basic questions, and failure to offer the answers will end up in no less than a nihilist impasse, which many people today suffer from.

An affirmative reply to these questions is vital. Modern man, in view of his disregard for these questions, is not willing to accept any principles. As such, he lives in ‘today’ and has neither ‘yesterday’ nor ‘tomorrow’. That is, if a person lives in comfort, ease and pleasure today, he has everything including the past and the future. For this reason, it can be asserted that contemporary man is present-oriented. The source of all principles and laws that determine man’s duty in relation to the four types of relationship is lost, i.e. religion. That which is lost is not something imaginary. It confirms all realities and without it, nothing can be considered good or bad.

Yet, the factor which prompts a person to find himself first and then his lost item is to pay attention to the fact that man is a meaningful part of a meaningful world, and in order to bring to fruition his potential, he must practically observe certain principles. From the religious perspective, people can perceive themselves as well as the philosophy behind man’s creation from the Origin of creation. It is by means of understanding this reality that a person can find himself first and then his lost item (religion).

Meanwhile, in examining the second part of the question, it must be noted that first of all, some people have turned away from religion and replaced it with concepts like universal ethics, universal rights, global culture, and the interesting term ‘humanism’. And, theoretically and practically, these terms have not been able to show what has essentially been lost.

Secondly, granted that man can bring down the abovementioned concepts from the domain of academia and practically make use of them, their supposed claims can only ensure a wholesome life in the realm of social relations. However, the real lost item will remain unknown To hide the true nature of the lost item from the minds of people, the prominent deviants have discovered an addictive ampule. By injecting it into the hearts and minds of people, they maximize their benefit. This addictive ampule is nothing but to amass wealth in whatever way possible.

Sixth point: It becomes clear that the need for religion is a real need whose essence does not change with the change of man’s perception about himself, the world and religion. The essence of the need for religion—as a reality outside the human constitution—is something fixed and it does not change

p: 117

with the changes in man’s perceptions about himself and the world he lives in. Yes, religion has something to do with man and his life. That reality is inalterable whether it emanates from superficial elements or genuine factors because man’s essence and its basic elements are inalterable.

Religion has something to do with man and his life just as intellection, feelings, self-love or self-preservation has something to do with man. As such, even if man’s perceptions of the four types of relationship change, the essence of intellection, feelings and self-preservation will never change.

If it is assumed that a time will come when man will lose his essential reality as well as his feelings, willpower, intellect, and desire for self- preservation, there will be no human beings then, let alone their essential features,like inclination to religion and its need.

p: 118

knowing the self are so many that there is no need for further elaboration. We shall mention some of the above here:

1. Examples of Qur’anic Verses Proving the Need for Knowing the Self:

﴿سَنُرِیهِمْ آیَاتِنَا فِی الآفَاقِ وَفِی أَنْفُسِهِمْ﴾

“Soon We shall show them Our signs in the horizons and in their own souls.”(1)

﴿وَفِی الأرْضِ آیَاتٌ لِلْمُوقِنِینَ ٭ وَفِی أَنْفُسِکُمْ أَفَلا تُبْصِرُونَ﴾

“In the earth are signs for those who have conviction, and in your own souls [as well]. Will you not then perceive?”(2)

﴿وَلا تَکُونُوا کَالَّذِینَ نَسُوا اللَّهَ فَأَنْسَاهُمْ أَنْفُسَهُمْ أُولَئِکَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ﴾

“And do not be like those who forget Allah, so He makes them forget their own souls.”(3)

﴿أَوَلا یَذْکُرُ الإنْسَانُ أَنَّا خَلَقْنَاهُ مِنْ قَبْلُ وَلَمْ یَکُ شَیْئًا﴾

“Does not man remember that We created him before when he was nothing?”(4)

Obviously, man can realize his past state of nothingness if he has advanced and attained perfection. Therefore, the requisite of understanding the past and its nature is to understand the present state.

﴿بَلِ الإنْسَانُ عَلَی نَفْسِهِ بَصِیرَةٌ ٭ وَلَوْ أَلْقَی مَعَاذِیرَهُ﴾

“Rather man is a witness to himself, though he should offer his excuses.”(5)

Reflecting on this great feature can either be through the natural disposition (fitrah) and common intellection, or through in-depth study and research. In both cases, knowing the self indicates growth [in a person].

﴿لَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الإِنسَانَ فِی أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِیمٍ﴾

“We certainly created man in the best of forms.”(6)

p: 120

﴿وَفِی خَلْقِکُمْ وَمَا یَبُثُّ مِنْ دَابَّةٍ آیَاتٌ لِقَوْمٍ یُوقِنُونَ﴾

“And in your creation [too], and whatever animals that He scatters abroad, there are signs for a people who have certainty.”(1)

There are many Qur’anic verses stating the superb order of the physical constitution and the greatness of the soul of man with enormous potential. There is no doubt that it is not only a reality but also encourages and urges man to know himself. A person who does not know himself is not different from animals. In fact, in terms of guidance, his condition is worse than animals. In this regard, God, the Blessed and Exalted, says:

﴿أُولَئِکَ کَالأنْعَامِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ﴾

“They are like cattle; rather they are more astray.”(2)

2. Examples of Traditions Proving the Need for Knowing the Self

مَنْ عَرَفَ نَفْسَهُ فَقَدْ عَرَفَ رَبَّهُ.

He who knows himself knows his Lord.(3)

The content of this hadīth has been narrated widely. We all know that no knowledge is greater and more essential than the knowledge of God. Therefore, knowledge of the self is an essential prerequisite, therefore, indispensable .

أَلْعَارِفُ مَنْ عرَفَ قَدْرَهُ.

“The gnostic is he who knows his worth.”(4)

وَکَفیٰ بِالْمَرْء جَهْلاً أَنْ لاَ یَعْرِفُ قَدْرَهُ.

“For the ignorance of a person, it is enough [indication] that he does not know his worth.”(5)

مَنْ جَهَلَ قَدْرَهُ عَداَ طورَهُ.

“He who is ignorant of his worth transgresses his due limit.”(6)

p: 121

مَنْ عَرَفَ نَفْسَهُ جَلَّ أُمره.

“He who knows himself attains his pinnacle.”(1)

The following traditions (ahadīth) prove the necessity of self-building in the realm of “what ought to be”.

مَنْ سَاسَ نَفْسَهُ أَدْرَکَ ٱلسٍّیَاسَة.

“He who manages himself knows management [and executes it, be it for himself or for others].”(2)

It is so, unless a person with all his potential and dimensions is not the same with all other human beings.

فَحَاسِبُ نَفْسَکَ لِنَفْسَکَ.

“Take account of yourself for the sake of your [own] self[’s attainment of perfection].”(3)

إِنَّ مِنْ أَحَبَّ عِبَادَالله إِلَیهِ عَبْداً أَعَانَهُ الله عَلیٰ نَفْسَهُ.

“The best of Allah’s servants in His sight is he, who helps Allah in regards to himself (his self-building).”(4)

فَمَنْ شَغَلَ نَفْسَهُ بِغَیرِهَا تَحَیَّرُ فِی ٱلظُلُمَاتِ.

“Whoever keeps himself with other than it, shall remain overwhelmed in darkness.”(5)

ولبئس ٱلمتجر أن تری ٱلدنیا لنفسک ثمناً.

“The worst of dealings is, for you to evaluate the world with yourself.”

That is, to take the world in exchange with yourself in a barter trade.

فأخذا امرء من نفسه لنفسه.

That is, in this world, every person must utilize his potential for the sake of self-building.

p: 122

﴿وَوُفِّیَتْ کُلُّ نَفْسٍ مَا کَسَبَتْ وَهُمْ لا یُظْلَمُونَ﴾

“And every soul shall be recompensed fully for what it has earned.”(1)

2. Verses which indicate that real loss belongs to those who let themselves incur a loss:

﴿قُلْ هَلْ نُنَبِّئُکُمْ بِالأخْسَرِینَ أَعْمَالا ٭ الَّذِینَ ضَلَّ سَعْیُهُمْ فِی الْحَیَاةِ الدُّنْیَا وَهُمْ یَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُمْ یُحْسِنُونَ صُنْعًا﴾

“Say, ‘Shall we inform you about the biggest losers in regard to actions? Those, whose endeavors go awry in the life of the world, while they suppose they are doing good’.”(2)

﴿إِنَّ الْخَاسِرِینَ الَّذِینَ خَسِرُوا أَنْفُسَهُمْ وَأَهْلِیهِمْ یَوْمَ الْقِیَامَةِ﴾

“Indeed the losers are those who have ruined themselves and their families on the Day of Resurrection.”(3)

According to Islam, every type of knowledge or learning which can be acquired in a course of time must be utilized in both realms—the realm of knowing the self as it is and as it ought to be. This is because Islam is based upon the fixed needs in both alterable and inalterable realms.

The perfectness of Islam and Islamic jurisprudence means that Islam deals with the principles of beliefs and laws, about man’s relationship with himself that can be the answer to all his permanent and changing needs.

We shall quote some examples of these beliefs and laws here:

1. Beliefs in the Realm of Knowing the Self as It is

2. Man possesses a body and soul.

3. In accordance with God’s Wisdom, man has been created for a lofty goal, which he must strive hard to attain.

4. The goal of man’s life is to bring his personality to fruition in the passageway of eternity, which is the Axis of Lordly Perfection.

5. The basic factors that help man’s advancement toward perfection along the path of lofty goal are his sublime feelings, intellection and pure

p: 124

conscience (fitrah).

6. If by making use of the above factors, man does not attain any spiritual growth, the ground for his moving along the path of fierce nature is paved.

7. Man has lofty positive faculties and potential as well as lowly negative traits.

8. Man has an essential honor, which can pave the ground for ideal honor through God-wariness (taqwa).

9. Man’s basic potential after perceiving the main origin and goal of life is the potential for social life.

10. Man enters into a contract for social life.

11. Man has the infinite potential for perfection in the physical domain as well as in the stages of spiritual growth, through teaching, learning, intuition, mystical unraveling (iktishafat), and practical inquiry.

12. Man’s most important positive potential is responsible freedom. The scope of his responsibilities is stated in jurisprudence and ethics. The sources of these beliefs are the Qur’an, Sunnah, reason (‘aql), and the consensus (consensus) of all learned men in every period and society, whose members possess a high level of culture.

Laws in the Realm of Knowing the Self as It Must be

1. Man must know himself as much as he can, and he must strive hard to reform and enhance his personality. “Self-alienation” is forbidden.(1)

2. It is necessary to provide amenities for an honorable life. Negligence in providing the amenities for an honorable life is forbidden.

3. It is necessary to change an environment that fosters moral and religious corruption. It is unlawful to lead a life in such an environment.

4. It is essential to respect human honor. It is unlawful to tolerate meanness, contempt and anything that undermines nobility.

p: 125

5. It is necessary to learn as much as possible whatever is essential for rational life. It is unlawful to refrain from learning it.

6. It is necessary to be concerned as much as possible with what is good and evil for society. It is unlawful to be indifferent and apathetic to the welfare or corruption of society.

7. It is necessary to strive hard for the enhancement of constructive abilities and discovery of what is essential for individual and social life.

8. It is necessary to stage a serious campaign against anything that can corrupt the soul. It is forbidden to excuse the self from facing the agents of corruption and be indifferent to them.

9. It is necessary to strive to attain responsible freedom. It is unlawful to prevent the self from facing the factors that could possibly achieve responsible freedom in the realm of values.

10. It is necessary to establish free connection with the amenities of the world so that they become man’s possession. Man’s possession of any amenity of the world is prohibited which leads to his expected downfall.

Since these beliefs and laws are in the realm of rational, intrinsic and moral self-building, one can understand their basis without need for technical and knotty reasoning. By obtaining the basis and cause of each of them, the necessary laws (obligatory) and meritorious laws (recommendatory) can also be understood. For example, it is essential to know, reform, and advance, to rescue the self from ignorance and self-alienation. In order to attain the stated goal, it is obligatory to undertake a bit of mental or rational activities. In the parlance of jurisprudence, these are called mustahabbat (recommendatory acts). In the above example, it is obligatory for person to increase his knowledge about himself to the extent necessary and to deal with terms above that necessary.

1. God, the Exalted, is the One and Only Being. He has no partner and equal. He is the All-knowing, the All-mighty, the Most Just, and the Most Wise.

2. God, the Exalted, is the Creator of the entire universe who created it with His absolute will and perfect wisdom.

3. God, the Exalted, is above everything. He encompasses everything and is needless of all things.

4. God, the Exalted, possesses all the Perfect Attributes of Beauty and Glory. Although the concepts of His Attributes are generally understandable to human beings, their ultimate essence or nature is beyond human comprehension.

5. God, the Exalted, is beyond the universe, time, and any determinate or indeterminate space. He is eternal, everlasting and infinite.

6. Of all the creatures in the universe, He bestows special grace and favor to man so that he can enter the Axis of Divine Perfection by acquiring knowledge and making sincere practical efforts.

7. God, the Exalted, reflects rays of His Lights into the hearts of those who succeed in observing the rules of Allah (adab Allah) and emulating the manners of Allah (akhlaq Allah).

8. Man is a being created according to the sublime wisdom and perfect will of God.

9. The perpetuity of human existence, as in the case of all other creatures, lies on the perpetuity of God’s favor.

10. The power, means and laws which govern volitional acts of man—what he says, does and thinks as well as any other activity within him—come from God while the intention, decision and choice lies with man. For this reason, man is responsible for his volitional act.

11. Man has the potential to achieve nearness (qurb) to God. This is the noblest of power existing in man in relation to God and activated by knowledge and God-wariness.

12. The quantity and quality of man’s proximity to God are beyond measure and description because there is no specific end for this state.

13. The love and mercy of God towards His servants is vaster than anything else, and His wrath or anger has something to do with the offense committed

p: 127

by the sinful person, and not as revenge in its common sense, which emanates from the defective and unpleasant feeling of the avenger.

14. Self-oblivion and self-alienation of man leads to being forsaken by God, which in turn leads to his self-centeredness and self-interest.

Gardener of the entire universe, the seeds of human talents and potential germinate. This potential is immense [volume 1 of Tarjumeh wa Sharh-e Nahj al-Balaghah] Moreover, the power of personification, ingenuity and its varieties are still unknown to man. This is an evaluation of the human being “as he is”.

Meanwhile, let us proceed to the universe “as it is”. It is true that in the course of history, man has tried to know himself and the universe and has also achieved remarkable success. By knowing the general principles which describe that fundamental system of man and the universe and state man’s duties in it, he has been able to direct himself along the path of a purposeful life and this can guarantee his felicity in the eternal life.

We shall now deal with the general principles of the universe as it is. Some of these principles are:

1. The universe is real and it is not a product of the human mind.

2. The coming into existence of the universe is true in the sense that it is created by the Will and Wisdom of God, and not by accident which goes against the law.(1)

3. The universe can be known in two ways:

- The human mind establishes a connection with the universe like a mirror, only showing physical appearances. This is a superficial connection, which does not refer to anything beyond the tangible, that can be experimented and with limited objectives.

- In addition to sensible observations and objective empirical experiments, the human mind can perceive the Divine signs as expressed in the astounding order and splendor of the universe. The Noble Qur’an has strongly emphasized acquisition of such vital knowledge about oneself and the universe. From the intellectual perspective, it must be stated that besides the universe’s direct connection with God, which exhibits the existence of law, order, motion and other components dependent upon Him, man and the universe are beyond interpretation and convincing justification. It is in view of this aspect of the universe that we say that for the

p: 129

conscious person, this world is a vast place of worship.

4. Like our knowledge about man, our knowledge about the universe is a product of two basic elements:

- The reality of man and the universe apart from their being factors for perception.

- The connection of the factors for perception with their special features, as in the case of the eye with specific compositions establishes connection with shapes and colors, and embeds its special product to knowledge. Similarly, laboratories and any means of extending or increasing our knowledge, with all the special features they have, clarify our knowledge.(1)

5. Without referring to God, the universe is beyond understanding and interpretation, a plaything in which no moral virtue or value has any meaning.

Since the order of the universe is beyond our control and with utmost order and splendor, one cannot destroy the universe, create another universe as replacement and then say that we must create the entire universe in the way it is supposed to be.(2) This is because the world “as it is” is the same world in which we are situated as part of it.

Since our physical life and spiritual life is not possible without change, the components of the universe could not have come into existence without activity and effecting of change in the course of history. In fact, it can be said that without effecting change, mankind cannot survive for even a day.

p: 130

4. There are two types of rivalries among human beings:

- Constructive rivalry is an agent of progress. It means accepting the equality and unity of all people along the path of rational life. It is obvious that this acceptance necessitates training and education as well as rational collective management. By realizing it human beings understand the life-giving Qur’anic verse which states that all are equal to one and one is equal to all:

﴿أَنَّهُ مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَیْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِی الأَرْضِ فَکَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِیعًا وَمَنْ أَحْیَاهَا فَکَأَنَّمَا أَحْیَا النَّاسَ جَمِیعًا﴾

“Whoever kills a soul, without [its being guilty of] manslaughter or corruption on the earth, is as though he had killed all mankind, and whoever saves a life is as though he had saved all mankind.”(1)

- Fatal rivalry or competition which is destructive. In every society whenever divine religion or morality is unable to control rivalries, fatal rivalry prevails over constructive rivalry. This is a specific manifestation of man’s selfishness and egoism, which only divine religion or morality can regulate. The compulsive psychological element of vengeance, retribution and stringent legalism stands in the way of the fatal rivalry in the physical sense, not uprooting it from man’s nature. Substantiating this point are the wars, revolutions and uncommon conditions of social life in which retribution and laws fail to function and the people emancipate themselves from the inner chain of fatalism and revolt, and sometimes they are more savage than the predators in grappling with each other.

Second Pilar: Man’s Relationship with Fellow Human Beings as It Should be

1. Real relationships emanate from the different types of man’s relations with his fellow human beings. We have mentioned the gist of these relationships under the heading “Man’s relationship with his fellow human beings”.

2. Just division of labor among all members of society

p: 132

3. Harmonizing society and using its collective wisdom and conscience

4. Dynamic and goal-oriented management of society

5. The most meritorious manager is one who regards all parts or members of the collective under his management as part of himself and himself as the collective “I” (personality).

6. Every person has to regard other members of society as members of the caravan that moves toward God along the path of “rational life”.

7. The members of any establishment must have the highest degree of expertise and commitment possible and assume responsibilities according to their disposition, but this disposition must not stand in the way of sublime perception and feelings for humanity.(1) For example, a judge with judicial expertise and commitment must never forget that he is a human being dealing with fellow human beings. An artist must acknowledge that he must always cultivate his artistic disposition with sublime feelings and perceptions.

8. In defending wholesome human life, all people are duty-bound, not only the state.

9. Defending honor, responsible freedom and other fundamental human rights in the order we have stated is obligatory to all.

10. Moral education of the people in society is essential. From the Islamic viewpoint, moral corruption of society is tantamount to its degeneration. The basic reason for the mission of the prophets, according to the saying of the Messenger of Allah s, is the perfection and refinement of excellent morality.

11. In social relations, the primary principle is social welfare, justice and benevolence for all. In this regard, the Holy Qur’an says:

﴿لاَ یَنْهَاکُمُ اللَّهُ عَنِ الَّذِینَ لَمْ یُقَاتِلُوکُمْ فِی الدِّینِ وَلَمْ یُخْرِجُوکُم مِّن دِیَارِکُمْ أَن تَبَرُّوهُمْ وَتُقْسِطُوا إِلَیْهِمْ﴾

“Allah does not forbid you in regard to those who did not make war

p: 133

against you on account of religion and did not expel you from you homes, that you deal with them with kindness and justice.”(1)

And in another verse, it states:

﴿لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلَنَا بِالْبَیِّنَاتِ وَأَنزَلْنَا مَعَهُمُ الْکِتَابَ وَالْمِیزَانَ لِیَقُومَ النَّاسُ بِالْقِسْطِ﴾

“Certainly We sent Our apostles with manifest proofs, and We sent down with them the Book and the Balance, so that mankind may maintain justice.”(2)

It is to be noted that the primary law in man’s relationship with his fellows is justice. In his blessed instruction to Malik al-Ashtar,(3) the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) said:

وَأَشْعِرْ قَلْبَکَ الرَّحْمَةَ لِلرَّعِیَّةِ، وَالْ-مَحَبَّةَ لَهُمْ، وَاللُّطْفَ بِهِمْ، وَلاَ تَکُونَنَّ عَلَیْهِمْ سَبُعاً ضَارِیاً تَغْتَنِمُ أَکْلَهُمْ، فَإِنَّهُمْ صِنْفَانِ: إِمَّا أَخٌ لَکَ فِی الدِّینِ، وَإمّا نَظِیرٌ لَکَ فِی الْخَلْقِ.

“O Malik! You must create in your mind kindness, compassion and love for your subjects. Do not behave towards them as if you are a voracious and ravenous beast and your success lies in devouring them. Remember that among your subjects there are two kinds of people: those who have the same religion as you have; they are brothers to you, and those who have religions other than that of yours, they are human beings like you.”(4)

We shall now state in detail the conclusions, which we have earlier stated in brief.

As a whole, the perfectness of a religion lies in the perfectness of the set of principles of intrinsic and rational beliefs substantiated by clear proofs of material and spiritual guidance, as well as complete jurisprudence, which can address all individual and social problems of man in both the physical

p: 134

and spiritual realms.

Commonly stated in Islamic philosophy and theology is the totality of fundamental beliefs such as the necessity for religion and the existence of the One and Only God who possesses all Attributes of Perfection like knowledge, power, wisdom, and justice. With the help of the ‘internal proof’ '(reason, pure human nature), and the ‘external proof’, i.e. prophets, mankind is guided towards the lofty goal of life. Man’s need for the existence of proof (hujjah) is a constant need. As such, the Shī‘ah perspective, after the Holy Prophet of Islam s, the pure Imams (‘a) are the proofs of God on earth. Like the Prophets (‘a), the Imams are infallible (ma‘sūm) and are immune from sin and error. After the Imams come the accomplished scholars (‘ulama’) and jurists (fuqaha) who are impervious to carnal urges and possess extraordinary justness. Their justness and knowledge of the totality of the roots and branches of religion are below that of the Infallibles (ma‘sūmīn) (‘a). The basis of this claim is the famous tradition which states:

وأمّا من ٱلفقهاء من کان صائناً لنفسه، مخالفاً لهواه، مطیعاً لأمر مولاه، فللعوام أن یقلّدوه.

“And of the fuqaha, whoever is wary of himself, opposes his carnal desires and obeys the command of His Master, it is incumbent upon the people to follow him.”

It can be inferred from the term sa’inan (wary) that the justness (‘adalah), which is one of the conditions set for the marja‘ al-taqlīd,(1) is above the term ‘adalah in jurisprudence (fiqh), deducible from the sahīhah (authentic narration) of ‘Abd Allah ibn Abī Ya‘fūr.(2)

This is the meaning of ‘adalah of the marja‘ al-taqlīd in the Shī‘ah world, that he is not even supposed to entertain in his mind the wish or inclination to go against religion and morality. This is the very meaning of “wariness” and “opposing carnal desire”. It has been the observance of this condition of purity throughout the history of Shī‘ism that the Shī‘ah have unconditionally

p: 135

and “opposing carnal desire”. It has been the observance of this condition of purity throughout the history of Shī‘ism that the Shī‘ah have unconditionally followed the maraji‘ al-taqlīd in self-sacrifice and struggled along the correct path.

It can be concluded from the previous discussions that the perfectness of Islamic jurisprudence includes the perfectness of laws, which help plan a social life that is responsive to man’s relationship with fellow human beings.

rules. This is particularly true if we consider the fact that [even] fuqaha’s occasional juristic slips in the course of deducing laws (istimbatat) has a juristic significance.

Second Feature

The right to a wholesome life is the most fundamental rule throughout the sources in jurisprudence, and deviation from it in whatever way imaginable is haram. Regarding the greatness of man’s life according to the jurisprudential sources of Islam, we shall point out some proofs:

1. According to the divine value system, every human being is equivalent to all human beings:

﴿مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَلِکَ کَتَبْنَا عَلَی بَنِی إِسْرَائِیلَ أَنَّهُ مَنْ قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَیْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِی الأرْضِ فَکَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِیعًا وَمَنْ أَحْیَاهَا فَکَأَنَّمَا أَحْیَا النَّاسَ جَمِیعًا﴾

“That is why We decreed for the Children of Israel that whoever takes a life, without [its being guilty of] manslaughter or corruption on the earth, is as though he had killed all mankind, and whoever saves a life is as though he had saved all mankind.”(1)

The formula of the human value according to this verse and other Islamic sources is as follows:

1 = all and all = 1

We must also bear in mind that “Children of Israel” [in this context] does not refer to a specific race or nation; rather, it refers to those people who have truly followed the religion of Prophet Ibrahīm (Abraham) (‘a), and any community or nation that follows the religion of Abraham must regard the above formula as a definite principle. For this reason, it must be stated that Islam, Christianity or any other religion whose Abrahamic origin has been proved must subscribe to the abovementioned principle.

1. No law or duty in Islam is suspended except when it harms human life, nor applicable to a person who is to be harmed; for example, the non-compulsoriness of ablution (wu¤ū) to a person for whom the use of water is harmful, and the non-compulsoriness of Hajj pilgrimage for a person who is incapable of travelling.

2. Any person who is downtrodden and abject in life and can emancipate

p: 137

himself from this state, yet he does not strive for it shall earn Divine wrath:

﴿إِنَّ الَّذِینَ تَوَفَّاهُمُ الْمَلائِکَةُ ظَالِمِی أَنْفُسِهِمْ قَالُوا فِیمَ کُنْتُمْ قَالُوا کُنَّا مُسْتَضْعَفِینَ فِی الأرْضِ قَالُوا

أَلَمْ تَکُنْ أَرْضُ اللَّهِ وَاسِعَةً فَتُهَاجِرُوا فِیهَا فَأُولَئِکَ مَأْوَاهُمْ جَهَنَّمُ وَسَاءَتْ مَصِیرًا﴾

“Indeed those whom the angels take away while they are wronging themselves, they ask, ‘What state were you in?’ They reply, ‘We were abased in the land.’ They say, ‘Was not Allah’s earth vast enough so that you might migrate in it?’ The refuge of such shall be hell, and it is an evil destination.”(1)

3. Islamic jurisprudential sources have 32 legal provisions regarding the rights of animals.(2) It is obvious that a divine religion which has prescribed the rights of animals, must have provided a perfect legal system for human rights.

In view of these two points, it can be established that the basis of Islamic jurisprudence is man. Therefore, the scope of Islamic jurisprudence is equivalent to human dimensions of ‘rational life’.

Third Feature

Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) or the legal system responds to all problems in life by opening the door of ijtihad(3) in all periods.(4) In previous years, the

p: 138

p: 139

Faculty of Law of the University of Paris, held a conference with the aim of discussing Islamic jurisprudence. The theme was “Islamic Jurisprudence Week”, and a group of orientalists and law professors from European and Muslim countries were invited. During the conference sessions, legal experts of France and other countries, as well as well-known orientalists, acknowledged the comprehensiveness of Islamic jurisprudence, confirming its competence for human societies in all periods. During the conference, the head of lawyers in Paris said: “I do not know how to reconcile these two things. On the one hand, through various propaganda campaigns, it is known everywhere that Islamic jurisprudence, notwithstanding its profundity, is not competent to serve as the legislative foundation of the needs of contemporary societies. On the other hand, in these conference sessions, in the course of presentation of scholarly studies and intellectual inquiries by experts in the field, I have learned certain points that refute those misconceptions through solid proofs and existing textual evidence and rulings.” At the end of the conference, a resolution signed by the participants who were lawyers and legislators was issued, confirming the dynamism of Islamic jurisprudence and its competence to respond to all problems of human society. At the closing program, all participants expressed their interest in continuing the “Islamic Jurisprudence Week” but unfortunately, due to some reasons, it was not continued.(1)

Fourth Feature

A perfect religion refers to the intrinsic rational beliefs substantiated by clear

p: 140

proofs guiding man in all his dimensions—physical and spiritual—while perfect jurisprudence offers the solution to all legal problems—individual and social—in the four types of relationship (man’s relationship with himself, God, the universe, and fellow human beings). Therefore, any legal or even moral system is “Islamic” commensurate to the degree of its consistency and compatibility with Islamic beliefs, jurisprudence and laws. For instance, in societies where the people believe in the One and Only God and His Attributes of Glory, they believe in Islam to that extent. Societies whose people refrain from killing, committing adultery, using intoxicants, telling lies, vilification, treason, and violating human rights actually observe the Islamic laws to that extent. People who regard order, law and honesty in life as essential and act upon them observe Islam to that extent. For this reason, when one of the Islamic figures returned home from his travel to some Western countries where he studied their way of life, he was asked to comment on the state of affairs there as compared to his own country. He said that if a person from an officially Muslim country travels to some Western countries and imagines that he goes to an absolutely un-Islamic society is absolutely wrong.

Fifth Feature

The aim of other legal systems organize the wellbeing of the fourth type of relationship (man’s relationship with his fellow human beings) in natural social life, and attempt to actually make it possible, by regulating the insatiable desires of man that lead to fatal rivalry. As to what extent they have correctly understood the stated goal is another story. However, Islamic jurisprudence regulates the insatiable desires of man through principles and laws that are compatible with all four types of relationship (man’s relationship with himself, God and the universe). In order to explain this point, we can compare Islamic jurisprudence to other legal systems of other societies as mentioned by a legal expert named Robert H. Jackson,(1) ex-US Attorney General. He says:

For an American, there is a fundamental contradiction between law and religion. In the West, even in countries in which there is a profound belief in the separation of church and state, the legal system

p: 141

is considered a secular matter in which exigency of the time plays a vital role. Of course, religious influences in the evolution of law have been very effective and strong. The Pentateuch that consists of the first five books of the Torah and the Christian teaching and church rules—each of them has contributed in our legal thought. In the past unusual or uncommon times influential statesmen would appoint judges and legislators from the clergy. Be that as it may, law has still remained a mundane matter. Legislatures for the enactment of laws, and courts for their execution, have existed. And these are considered institutions of this world that have something to do with the state and not with the church or religion. As such, our law in America does not determine religious duties. On the contrary, it cogently eliminates them. Law in America has only a limited link with the discharging of moral duties. In fact, an American might be morally obedient to the law, and at the same time, a mean and corrupt person.(1)

It can be clearly inferred from the above passage that nowadays, laws in the United States and other Western societies, are codified for the management of secular life only; in the physical life of the members of society in the context of coexistence,,a purely mechanical life. In such systems, no individual or group recognizes a duty above the law even if it is related to the life, honor and responsible freedom of others. For example, if an individual, a group or society faces an epidemic, a bloodthirsty murderer or an exploitative system, no one has the right or duty to take steps to prevent it. In the legal systems of Western societies, man’s origin, end and goal of life does not signify. His rights and duties revolve around a mechanical, purely natural dimension of life. Obviously, Islamic law cannot allow man with such nobility to be humiliated to that extent. In continuation, Jackson says:

But, on the contrary, in Islamic laws the fountainhead of legislation is the will of God which is discovered and made explicit by His Prophet Muhammad. This law and this will of God considers all believers a single community although they belong to various tribes and nations and have different conditions and locations, far and near. Here, religion is a wholesome force that binds the community together, and

p: 142

not nationality and geographical boundaries. Here, the state itself is subservient and subject to the Qur’an and there is no more room for another legislator, let alone giving room for any sort of criticism, skepticism and hypocrisy. For the believer, this world is a passageway to the other world, which is a better one. The Qur’an specifies the rules, laws and manner of behaving with one another and another group so as to ensure a wholesome change from this world to the next world. It is impossible to distinguish political or judicial theories and views from the Prophet’s teachings—teachings that determine the mode of behavior in relation to religious principles as well as the personal and sociopolitical way of life of all. These teachings determine more duties and responsibilities than rights for man.(1)

Due to his insufficient knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence, Jackson was unaware that in our jurisprudence, duties are of two types:

1. Personal duties (like acts of worship), and

2. Mutual duties of individuals, societies and the state

Every duty prescribed to an individual, society or state breeds a right, and the emergence of a right necessitates the existence of a duty.

In interpreting the duties prescribed by Islam to the people, Jackson says:

That is, moral commitments which an individual is required to fulfill are given more attention, and no position on earth can exempt him from fulfilling them. And if he disobeys, his future life will be endangered.(2)

Another mistake of Jackson’s is as follows:

Firstly, the term “moral commitments” requiring “fulfillment” is not appropriate because the merit of morality lies on its being voluntary. Thus, moral commitments neither mean natural fatalism nor are based upon compulsory duty.

Secondly, Jackson should bear in mind that the discharge of duties of individuals, groups and the government in a society is impossible without the materialization of rights. He himself acknowledges, thus:

p: 143

The teachings related to religious or philosophical principles reject Islamic laws. The fact, however, is that the same system considered to be impractical has achieved astounding success. Approximately one century after the death of Muhammad, his vibrant and unifying religion—although devoid of a well-established state, a permanent army and common political ideals—was able to mould his tribe and nation to reach the shores of Africa, overrun Spain and threaten France.(1)

It is necessary for those particularly in Muslim societies, who, in spite of having no sufficient knowledge, talk about religion and Islamic jurisprudence, to pay attention to the following lines:

1. “The fact, however, is that the same system considered to be impractical has achieved astounding success.”

2. The next passage of Jackson is as follows:

The main point is that we have just started knowing the fact that this religion, which is the youngest in the world, has formulated a jurisprudence that gives a sense of justice to millions of people under the scorching skies of Africa, Asia and thousands of other people living in American countries.(2)

This statistical data was true approximately 30 years ago. Based on recent statistical data, the world Muslim population has reached about one billion and two hundred million. Eight million of them live in Western Europe and ten million in America and other non-Muslim countries.

Jackson [also] says:

Although it is possible that in relation to religious inspiration, we are doubtful of its rights, the said rights give us very important lessons in the implementation of laws. Now, the time has come not to consider us as the only people who want justice or understand the meaning of justice. This is because in their legal systems, Muslim countries have been trying to attain this goal and their experiences give vital lessons to us.(3)

p: 144

If the Islamic laws or jurisprudence was identical or similar to others, the above passage would have been totally senseless.

The last part of Jackson’s passage contains a very significant confession, which can serve as a lesson to those who talk ignorantly about Islamic laws or jurisprudence. He says:

It usually happens that in the course of time legal terms connote a set of beliefs and ideas, especially for the neophytes [in law]. For example, our terms like “according to the due process,” “courts’ opinion,” “based on justice,” “trial before the jury,” and “judicial review” have meaning for the English-speaking people which cannot be understood by other people. The same is true with many Islamic legal terms. It is possible for an Islamic legal term to have many meanings to interpret, which we may possibly interpret, but since we do not have a similar term in our laws, we cannot find a suitable legal term for it.(1)

In order to complete the earlier discussions about the salient features of Islamic jurisprudence, it is necessary to have an overview of the types of general rules based on the principal sources of jurisprudence, viz. the Qur’an, Sunnah, consensus (ijma‘), and reason (‘aql).

﴿یُرِیدُ اللّهُ بِکُمُ الْیُسْرَ وَلاَ یُرِیدُ بِکُمُ الْعُسْرَ﴾

“Allah desires ease for you, and He does not desire hardship for you.”(1)

2. Qawa’id mustanbatah or istiyadiyyah. Such rules are not inferred from a specific text but taken from the totality of the sections (abwab) in jurisprudence that cover the purport of the rule; for example:

Pondering on what is more important in

cases of contradiction of two laws, such as the permission to pass by an

area without the owner’s permission, to save someone from drowning. Since

saving a life is more important than passing by an area without its

owner’s permission, the permission to pass by (to save life) takes

precedence over what is important (the owner’s right to his property).

Every contract and promise, nay every

kind of commitment, is based on intention. In other words,

العقود وما قام مقامها تتبع القصود

“Contracts and what follow them depend on intentions.”

As it is obvious, such rules are based upon the dictates of reason.

3. Qawa’id ‘aqliyyah badīhiyyah (axiomatic rational rules). Universal propositions which are based on the dictates of reason are called ‘rational rules’ (qawa’id ‘aqliyyah); for example:

Qa’idah nazm (rule on order): Since the social life of human beings is impossible without order

and harmony between objectives and means, every action and idea that

fosters it are necessary. Reason considers them obligatory.

Qa’idah daf‘ zarar muhtamil

(rule on preventing probable harm): In every situation in which there is a

reasonable probability of harm, reason would consider giving it a rule. Of

course, if one regards this rule as part of qa’idah la zarar

wa la zirar, it will be covered by that general rule.(2)

4. Bana-ye ‘uqala’ (agreed upon by the men of reason): The difference

p: 146

between ‘rational laws’ (ahkam-e ‘aqlī) and those agreed upon by the men of reason (bana’-ye ‘uqala’) is that, there is no specific proof supporting the propositions agreed upon by them, but are confirmed and acted upon by men of reason for their being men of reason. Meanwhile, rational propositions or laws can be actually proven by appropriate proofs or, like rational axioms (badīhiyyat-e ‘aqliyyah), to prove them does not require any proof, or they are like substantiated propositions whose proofs are embedded within; technically, they are called “propositions with accompanying syllogisms” (qazaya qiyasatuha ma‘aha).

5. Mansūs al-‘illah (cause being explicitly stated in the text): concerning the reason for a juristic ruling, whenever the reason or cause is mansūs the said ruling is called mansūs al-‘illah. The scope of the said ruling depends on the scope of the cause. For example, in the traditions related to the ruling on zakat (poor-rate),(1) the elimination of poverty in society is the cause. So, the items liable for zakat must be increased until the elimination of poverty in society.

6. Tanqīh manat qat‘ī: The term used refers to the set of rulings whose cause is not explicitly mentioned. However, in view of the truthfulness of the ruling and definite motive behind it, its cause can certainly be identified, as in the case of the prohibition of hoarding. Apart from its being rational, its ruling can be deduced from numerous traditions. Although the cause behind this very important ruling cannot be found in the text of the traditions, by considering the nature of the items which are forbidden to hoard and the span of time of doing it, it would be certain that the real cause behind the prohibition is to remove the emergency needs in human life. By citing this cause, the jurisprudent (faqīh) can give a ruling on the prohibition of hoarding items indispensable for the lives of people; for example, medicines, vehicles and telecommunication devices.

7. Istishmam fiqhī (juristic acumen): In many cases, there may be no specific proof to support a ruling, or the proof is ambiguous, or there may be proofs but they contradict each other. In such a case, by taking into account the totality of principles, general rules, proofs, criteria [and wisdom] of the jurisprudential sources inculcated in his mind, the jurisprudent can discern a given ruling through intuitive jurisprudential acumen. For instance, in

p: 147

discussing whether intention (niyyah) is a part (juz’) or condition (shart) of the acts of worship, some high-ranking jurisprudents maintain that “it is more akin to condition” (wa bi ’sh-shart ashbah); that is, intention is more likely to be a condition rather than being a part of the acts of worship.

The outcomes of the above rulings and cases are the following:

1. Rulings on duties (ahkam taklīfiyyah);

2. Rulings on positions (ahkam waz‘iyyah);

3. Primary actual rulings (ahkam waqi‘ī awwalī);

4. Secondary actual rulings (ahkam waqi‘ī thanawī);

5. Primary outward rulings (ahkam zahirī awwalī);

6. Secondary outward rulings (ahkam zahirī thanawī);

7. Rulings based on the jurist’s guardianship (wilayat al-faqīh);

8. Legal topics (mawzū‘at shar‘iyyah); and

9. Customary topics (mawzū‘at ‘urfiyyah).

life. The substance of Islamic jurisprudence is substantiated by decisive proofs clearly deducible from the Qur’an, and authentic traditions.

1. Regarding fitrah, the following noble verse is cited:

﴿فَأَقِمْ وَجْهَکَ لِلدِّینِ حَنِیفًا فِطْرَةَ اللَّهِ الَّتِی فَطَرَ النَّاسَ عَلَیْهَا لاَ تَبْدِیلَ لِخَلْقِ اللَّهِ﴾

“So set your heart on the religion as a people of pure faith, the origination of Allah according to which He originated mankind. There is no altering Allah’s creation.”(1)

2. Concerning reason (‘aql), there are many verses which enjoin people to follow the dictates of reason; for example,

﴿أَتَأْمُرُونَ النَّاسَ بِالْبِرِّ وَتَنْسَوْنَ أَنْفُسَکُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ تَتْلُونَ الْکِتَابَ أَفَلا تَعْقِلُونَ﴾

“Will you bid others to piety and forget yourselves, while you recite the Book? Do you not apply reason?”(2)

Similarly, there are numerous authentic traditions that clearly establish reason as (hujjah) the ‘inward proof’ in contrast to the ‘outward proof’, which refers to the prophets. For example, regarding the motive behind the mission of the prophets, Imam ‘Alī (‘a) said:

وَیُثِیرُوا لَهُمْ دَفاَئِنَ ٱلْعُقُولِ.

“…to unveil before them the hidden virtues of wisdom…”(3)

3. Regarding justice, Qur’anic verses and authentic traditions support the indispensability of justice in organizing and molding human life both in individual and collective forms; for example,

﴿لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلَنَا بِالْبَیِّنَاتِ وَأَنزَلْنَا مَعَهُمُ الْکِتَابَ وَالْمِیزَانَ لِیَقُومَ النَّاسُ بِالْقِسْطِ﴾

“Certainly We sent Our apostles with manifest proofs, and We sent down with them the Book and the Balance, so that mankind may maintain justice.”(4)

﴿وَتَمَّتْ کَلِمَتُ رَبِّکَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا ۚ لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِکَلِمَتِهِۦ ۚ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِیعُ ٱلْعَلِیمُ﴾

“The word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and justice. Nothing can change His words, and He is the All-hearing, the All-

p: 149

knowing.”(1)

The human need for laws and rights pertaining to the said matters about money is an essential need, and Islamic jurisprudence explicitly addresses those needs based on texts or rules extracted from reliable sources. Yet, hundreds of legal items related to the legality of usury has no place in Islamic jurisprudence because the need for such legal items stems from extreme self-centeredness and economic domineering and is a superficial one. It should not be asserted that Islamic jurisprudence is insufficient because it does not consider the essence of usury legitimate, let alone legislate and enact laws and rules for it.

Similarly, it is also possible for certain societies to repel existing conditions and rules governing sexual relations and regard illegitimate relations as legal (whether with similar or opposite class (sinf))(1) and then to enact specific laws for such relations! However, since it does not recognize illegitimate relations, Islamic jurisprudence also regards the need for laws pertaining to them as artificial. Like other artificial items coupled with the tricks of selfish individuals, it creates artificial demands and uninformed people will be drawn to them, thinking that the created demands are indeed natural and needed.

rak‘ahs of fajr prayer and loud recitations (jahr) in it, and the seven times circumambulation (tawaf) of the Ka‘bah in a specific manner. However, fitrah and ‘aql can be presented to the same extent as much as the need of worship can be proven to man. Let us elaborate. After accepting man’s need to be in the Axis of Absolute Perfection (God, the Glorious and Exalted), the necessity of worship with sincere intention, free from any motive for other than God, is one of the most axiomatic realization of the natural disposition and reason that must be followed. It is obvious that if we limit ourselves only to mental vigilance (muraqibah) and do not verbally recite anything or perform specific movements, like kneeling down (rukū‘), prostration (sujūd), circumambulation, with specific conditions of time and place, illogical claims will replace these acts of worship with the passage of time, and extinguish the very essence of worship. As stated in ‘Ilal al-Sharayi‘,(1) by leaving the quality and quantity of worship to the discretion of the people, its importance will gradually fade away. Furthermore, these qualitative and quantitative aspects have subtle signs which can clearly be discerned by a sound mind; for example, bending in rukū‘is a gesture of humility and placing the forehead on the ground is the utmost sign of surrender and submission.

Jurisprudential rules refer to universal propositions applicable to particular cases. In giving a ruling on particular cases, those propositions shall be referred to; for example, the rule of “neither loss nor harm” (la zarar wa la zarar) and the principle of the exigency of transactions. In acting upon these propositions, the mujtahid and the muqallid(2) are the same. They are both obliged to abide by them. However, the jurisprudent (faqīh), depends on the rules of jurisprudence to prove universal propositions.

The rules cited in jurisprudence can be generally divided into two.

A) The rules provided for in the primary sources; for example, the rules of “negation of difficulty” (nafī ‘asar wa haraj) and “neither loss nor harm” as provided for in this Qur’anic verse:

p: 152

﴿مَا یُرِیدُ اللَّهُ لِیَجْعَلَ عَلَیْکُمْ مِنْ حَرَجٍ﴾

“Allah does not desire to put you to hardship.”(1)

B) The rules inferred by reliable proofs; for example, the preponderance of what is more important (ahamm) to what is important (muhimm) in cases of contradiction.

In jurisprudence, the ways of discovering realities differ, but all of them are either supported by the perception of pure nature, such as yaqīn (certainty) and qata‘ (suspension of judgment), or reason. For example, rational rulings that revoke the rulings’ requirement, and data, whose being discovered is completed by the Legislator, such as Qur’anic verses, whose indication of the reality is abstract, and traditions, whose issuance (being authentic) is not definite. However, by complementing their proofs by other means, their potential of revealing legal realities is rational. Meanwhile, the principles that are cited to remove any confusion in doubtful cases, such as the principle of disavowal [of the polytheists] (bara’at) and the principle of preponderance of eliminating harm over gaining profit, are rational propositions, although their being proofs can also be consolidated by the endorsement of the Islamic legislator.

In view of their functional scope in jurisprudence, jurisprudential rules can be generally divided into two:

A) General rules that can be implemented in all sections (abwab) of jurisprudence

B) Particular rules that can be cited in some sections of jurisprudence.

4. The preponderance of what is more important over what is important in cases of contradiction between the two.

5. Commonality in the discharge of religious duty:

﴿وَمَآ أَرْسَلْنَکَ إِلَّا کَآفَّةً لِّلنَّاسِ بَشِیرًا وَنَذِیرًا﴾

“We did not send you except as a bearer of good news and warner to all mankind.”(1)

6. The lack of interference between cause and effect

7. The primacy of correctness: “Let your Muslim brother act properly.”

8. The primacy of the correctness of the obliged person’s (mukallaf) action in relation to himself; that is, according to the level of awareness and willpower, every person relies on whose action is correct.

9. The primacy of the correctness of things: this principle is not limited to a Muslim or believer’s action but rather includes all things, states and human actions in the domain of nature’s rational laws.

10. The elimination of harm takes precedence over gaining of profit:

دفع ٱلضرر أولی من جلب ٱلنفع.

11. Exigencies suspend prohibitions:

الضرورات تبیح ٱلمحظورات.

12. The suspension of prohibitions is commensurate to the extent of exigencies:

الضرورات تقدّر بقدرها.

13. Evil and harm must be eliminated as much as possible:

الشرّ یدفع.

14. The more general (a‘am) and the majority (aghlab) can be a preferred item or indication of a ruling:

الظنّ یلحق ٱلشیء بالأعم ٱلأغلب.

15. Every religious duty that cannot be discharged in full should not be abandoned in full:

ما لا یدرک کله لا یترک کلّه.

المیسور لا یسقط بالمعسور.

إن أمرتکم بشیء فأتوا منه ما استطعتم.

p: 154

16. The impermissibility of helping in sin and unlawfulness:

﴿وَلاَ تَعاَوَنُوا عَلی ٱلإِثْمِ وَٱلعُدْواَنِ.﴾

17. The applicability of the rulings on position in relation to different conditions; for example, warranty on squandering the property of another person irrespective of his age, level of knowledge (in managing his property) or any other condition pertaining to the attainment of maturity or age of responsibility.

18. The compulsoriness of something to a community which it considers incumbent upon itself:

ألزموهم بما ٱلزموا به أنفسهم.

19. The principle of acting upon the previous religious codes of law (sharayi‘) provided that they do not contradict Islamic laws:

استصحاب ٱلشرائع ٱلسابقة.

20. The principle of acting upon the views of men of reason, except in case they contradict Islam, in which case, it is obligatory to avoid contradicting Islam.

21. Whatever is needed by the legal course of individual life, the responsibility of procuring it lies upon the shoulder of the individual if he is capable, and in case he is incapable, it is a collective responsibility.

22. Whatever is needed by the system of social life, it is wajib kifa’ī(1) to procure it and in case only some individuals can procure it, it becomes wajib ‘aynī (personal obligation).

23. The principle of the absence of superiority of one person over another except for a reason, which is proven, like the superiority of the guardian over the minor.

24. The guardian (walī) Imam is he who has no guardian:

p: 155

الإمام ولیّ من لا ولیّ له.

25. The actions done by a person prior to his becoming Muslim has no retroactive effect: “Islam loves what comes before it.”

ألإسلام یحبّ ما قبله.

26. Acting upon legitimate conditions is obligatory: “Muslims are associated with their conditions except that which contradicts the Book (Qur’an) or the Sunnah.”

المسلمون عند شروطهم إلاّ ما خالف ٱلکتاب أو ٱلسّنّة.

27. In determining the cases of ambiguity when there is no proof of determining any of them, the principle of casting lots (qur‘ah) can be used: “Casting lots pertains to every problematic matter.”

القرعة علی کلّ أمر مشکل.

28. Istishab or the principle of permanence of every ruling or subject which has existed before and its present existence is doubtful.

29. The principle of permissibility of things: “All things are pure even if there is prohibition in them.”

کلّ شیء مطلق حتّی یرد فیه ٱلنّهی.

30. The principle of immunity for non-Muslims (Ahl al-Dhimmah).(1) .

31. Ignorance suspends a ruling except in case of ignorance by shortcoming: “My community is beyond what it does not know.”

رُفع عن أمّتی ما لا یعلمون.

32. Compulsion and coercion suspend a ruling: “My community is beyond… what is imposed upon it.”

رُفع عن أمّتی... وما استکرهوا علیه.

33. Constraint does not annul transactions although the transaction of constrained individuals is imposed.

34. In actions whose cause totally brings about their actualization and the person that supervises their performance as the agent, the discretion is with

p: 156

the cause, and the actions shall be attributed to the cause:

العمل للسبب عند ما کان ٱلمباشر کالآلة ٱلمحضة.

35. If acting upon a religious ruling brings about harm on the life, property and honor of a person at the hands of followers of another belief, acting upon that ruling is suspended under the necessity of dissimulation (taqiyyah) and behaving contrary to it is obligatory except in case of killing somebody, because even motivated by taqiyyah, one is not allowed to kill someone else:

﴿مَن کَفَرَ بِاللّهِ مِن بَعْدِ إیمَانِهِ إِلاَّ مَنْ أُکْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالإِیمَانِ﴾

“Whoever renounces faith in Allah after [affirming] his faith—except someone who is compelled while his heart is at rest in faith...”(1)

﴿...إِلاَّ أَن تَتَّقُواْ مِنْهُمْ تُقَاةً﴾

“…except when you are wary of them out of caution.”(2)

36. The principle of the absence of imposition of a ruling and duty on others except in cases like [loud] recitation in congregational prayers done by the imam on behalf of his followers (ma’munīn):

الأصل عدم تحمّل ٱلإنسان عن غیره إلاّ موارد ٱلدّلیل علیه.

37. If the reason behind a ruling has many components, all those components are integral parts of the reason. So, negation of one of them leads to negation of the reason, and therefore the supposed ruling shall be negated:

کلّ ما کانت ٱلعلّة مرکّبةً توقّف الحکم علی إجتماع جمیع أجزائها.

38. The rule of justice: this rule is one of the most fundamental rules of jurisprudence in all its sections.

39. A ruling’s inclusion of a case which has not been a subject of the ruling but later becomes a subject of it; for example, when a person endows something for the poor and later he becomes poor, he will also be entitled to the endowed item:

قد یثبت ضمناً ما لم یثبت أصلاً.

40. Those who are the nearest to a person take precedence in acquiring

p: 157

anything good from him as well as in incurring any harm from him over those who are distant from him; for example, the issue of inheritance and blood-money. This law is the most fundamental element of human interrelationship which cures man’s illness of alienation from one another as well as alienation from his own self:

الأقربون أحقّ بالمعروف والأقرب یمنع الابعد.

41. The criterion for the value of action lies in the intention:

لکلّ امریءٍ ما نوی.

“Every man shall have what he intended.”

إنّما ٱلأعمال بالنیّات.

“Indeed actions are [judged] by the intentions.”

النیّة روح ٱلعمل.

“Intention is the spirit of action.”

42. In the case of a particular or general ruling supported by a particular reason, this ruling is repelled by the absence of the reason behind it:

الحکم الخاصّ والعام المستند إلی السبب المعیّن ینتقی بانتفاء السبب.

43. Writing a will (wasiyyah) is the right of every Muslim:

﴿کُتِبَ عَلَیْکُمْ إِذَا حَضَرَ أَحَدَکُمُ ٱلْمَوْتُ إِن تَرَکَ خَیْرًا ٱلْوَصِیَّةُ لِلْوَلِدَیْنِ وَٱلْأَقْرَبِینَ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ ۖ حَقًّا عَلَی ٱلْمُتَّقِینَ﴾

“Prescribed for you, when death approaches any of you and he leaves behind any property, is that he make a bequest for his parents and relatives, in an honorable manner—an obligation on the God-wary.”(1)

44. He who is more meritorious is more deserving than others to acquire a thing:

من سبق إلی شیء لم یسبق علیه أحد قبله فهو أولی به.

45. The statement of a person which has no way of proving except himself is a proof, unless he is accused of lying: “The saying of one who is unknown before, except as an accused, must be heard.”

یجب سماع قول من لا یعلم إلاّ من قبله إلاّ أَن یکون متّهماً.

p: 158

46. If the suspension of the impermissibility of a ruling depends on the existence of a condition or cause, it is necessary to present the said condition or cause to give a ruling on its permissibility.

47. If the suspension of an obligatory ruling depends on a condition or cause, one must present the said condition or cause in order to give ruling on the permissibility of its suspension.

48. A useful work is valuable and its value must not be taken away from it:

العمل المحترم لا یکون ضائعاً.

49. The real value of a work must always be taken into account:

﴿وَلَا تَبْخَسُوا۟ ٱلنَّاسَ أَشْیَآءَهُمْ﴾

“And do not cheat the people of their goods.”(1)

50. The child for a legal wife serves as the stone of penalty for the adulterer: “The child is for the bed while the adulterer is for the stone.”

الولد للفراش وللعاهر الحجر.

51. It is unlawful (haram) to consume property wrongfully:

﴿وَلَا تَأْکُلُوا۟ أَمْوَلَکُم بَیْنَکُم بِالْبَطِلِ﴾

“Do not eat up your wealth among yourselves wrongfully.”(2)

52. Maturity, reason and physical strength are among the general conditions for the assumption of responsibility and commitment:

﴿مَا یُرِیدُ اللَّهُ لِیَجْعَلَ عَلَیْکُمْ مِنْ حَرَجٍ﴾

“Allah does not desire to put you to hardship.”(3)

رفع القلم عن الصبّی والمجنون.

“The pen is lifted for the minor and the crazy.”

الذمّة للمکلف.

“Disclosure is for the obliged person (mukallaf).”

53. The impermissibility of imitation (taqlīd) in matters of the principles of beliefs and all rational cases on which reason rules: “The principles of belief

p: 159

are by discernment and inference and not by imitation.”

أصول العقائد بالنظر وٱلإستدلال لا بالتقلید.

54. The principle of the sufficiency of a solitary report (khabar wahid) as proof (hujjah) on certain subjects as substantiated by proofs such as the meaning of the Qur’anic verse, “O you who have faith! If a profligate [person] should bring you some news, verify it, lest you should visit [harm] on some people out of ignorance, and then become regretful for what you have done,”(1) and the views of men of reason.

55. Determining the ways of discharging responsibilities and proving rulings on position (waz‘iyyah) depend on reason and the men of reason:

تعیین طرق امتثال التکالیف والأحکام الوضعیة موکول إلی العقل والعقلاء.

56. Collation of general concepts and propositions with their cases is rational.

57. Anyone who benefits from something shall also incur the harm it may bring:

من له الغنم فله الغرم.

58. Anything which is permissible to be loaned shall also be permissible to be rented:

کلّ ما یصّح قرضه تصح إجارته.

59. That which is religiously impossible is also most likely rationally impossible:

الممتنع شرعاً ممتنع عقلاً.

60. That which may possibly be ignored in secondary matters cannot be ignored in matters of principles. For instance, it is invalid to give as endowment that which does not exist but it is valid to give as endowment what is nonexistent but comes into existence later:

یغتفر فی التوابع ما لا یغتفر فی غیرها.

61. It is common for a divorcee (mutlaq) to adopt ‘single’ [status] (fard) provided that this adoption is not primary:

المطلق ینصرف إلی الفرد الشائع.

p: 160

62. An opinion cannot be attributed to someone silent although he can speak for himself, unless there are pieces of evidence proving or disproving it: “A saying cannot be attributed to the silent.”

لا ینسب لساکتٍ قول.

63. It is invalid to delay a statement from the time of need [for it]:

لا یصحّ تأخیر البیان عن وقت الحاجة.

64. That which is optionally outside choice has no contradiction with freewill and responsibility: “Contrary to the choice does not contradict the choice.”

المنافی للإختیار لا ینافی الإختیار.

65. That which is established in the past as righteous practice and there is no proof to the contrary, shall remain as such:

القدیم یترک علی قدمة یا مالک، ولا تنقض سنّةً صالحةً عمل بها صدور هذه الأمّة.

ولا تنقض الیقین بالشکّ.

“And do not turn certainty into doubt.”

66. Acknowledgment of the position of a composition shall be deemed composition:

الإقرار فی موضع الإنشاء إنشاء.

67. A principle serves as the proof as long as there is no [contrary] proof: “The principle is a proof where there is no proof.”

الأصل دلیل حیث لا دلیل.

68. Relying and acting upon a statement is better than overlooking and neglecting the same:

إعمال الکلام أَولی من إهماله.

69. Permission concerning a thing means permission concerning its axiomatic properties:

الإذن فی الشیءِ إِذن فی لوازمة البیّنة.

70. As there is no more obstruction, prohibition takes effect:

إذا زال المانع عاد الممنوع.

71. Reconciliation is the mother of all transactions:

p: 161

الصلح سید المعاملاتِ.

72. Where two proofs or rulings are contradictory, both of them are suspended:

إذا زال المانع عاد الممنوع.

73. Reconciliation of two contraries or contradictories to the extent possible is better than neglecting them both:

الجمع مهما أمکن أولی مِن الطرح.

74. As an intelligible probability appears, any [contrary] inference is invalid:

إذا جاءَ الإحتمال بطل الإستدلال.

75. The owner’s possession of a property which is transferred from him to another person through a transaction or any other way is annulled, and possession of a property which is transferred to him is the effect of and permitted by the transaction:

التّصّرّف فیما أَنْتَقَلَ عَنْهُ فَسْخُ وَفٍیماَ ٱنْتَقَلَ إِلیهِ إجازةٌ وانفاذ.

76. Commitment to a thing means commitment to its requisites:

الأَلْتَزَامِ بِالشَّیء ألْتزامٌ بلوازمه.

77. Suspension of a ruling on a quality (wasf) proves the causality of the quality for the ruling:

تَعْلِیقُ الْحکم بالوصف مشعر بالعلّیة.

78. In case of contradiction between quality (wasf) and allusion (isharah), the latter shall prevail provided that the alluded peculiarities and qualities are clear:

فی تعارض الوصف والاشارة تقدّم الاشارة بشرط أن یکون مختصّات الموضوع وأوصافها واضحاً.

79. Incapability to perform religious duties leads to suspension [of the obligation to perform them]:

﴿فَإِنْ کَانَ ذُو عُسْرَةٍ فَنَظِرَةٌ إِلَی مَیْسَرَةٍ.﴾

2. Confession of the sound-minded against himself is permissible:

إقرار العقلاء علی أنفسهم جائز.

3. Everyone has the authority to confess about anything he owns. From one perspective, this rule is one of the forms of the above rule:

من ملک شیئاً ملک الإقرار به.

4. Confession after denial is not valid:

لا یصّح الإنکار بعد الإقرار.

5. Giving of testimony is obligatory and concealment of the same is forbidden:

﴿وَلاَ یَأْبَ الشُّهَدَاءُ إِذَا مَا دُعُوا.﴾

6. Between acquitting a wrongdoer and convicting an innocent, the first takes precedence.

7. To punish justly the religious offenders and criminals while taking into account the goals of ‘rational life’, is permissible.

2. Example of the Principles and Rules of Retaliation, Penal Law and Fines

1. No blood of any Muslim (according to Qur’anic verses, traditions and dictate of reason) and noble person shall be shed:

لا یطلّّ دم امرءٍ مسلم.

“The blood of a Muslim shall not be overlooked.”

﴿وَمَنْ یَقْتُلْ مُؤْمٍِناً مُتَعَمِّداً فَجَزَاؤُهُ جَهَنَّمُ خَالِداً فِیهَا.﴾

“And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his punishment is hell; he shall abide in it.”

﴿مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَلِکَ کَتَبْنَا عَلَی بَنِی إِسْرَائِیلَ أَنَّهُ مَنْ قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَیْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِی الأرْضِ فَکَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِیعًا وَمَنْ أَحْیَاهَا فَکَأَنَّمَا أَحْیَا النَّاسَ جَمِیعًا﴾

“That is why We decreed for the Children of Israel that whoever takes a life, without [its being guilty of] manslaughter or corruption on the earth, is as though he had killed all mankind, and whoever saves a life is as though he had saved all mankind.”(1)

p: 163

2. Hudūd(1) shall be aborted by mere doubt:

تُدرأ الحدود بالشبهات.

3. In case of unintended murder, it is incumbent upon the sound-minded [offender] to pay blood-money:

الدیة فی القتل الخطأ علی العاقلة.

4. In case of premeditated murder, the penalty is one of the three, viz. qisas,(2) [giving of] blood-money (diyah), or pardon (‘afw):(3)

فی القتل العمد أحد الامور الثلاثة، القصاص أو الدیة أو العفو.

4. If the repayment or fine, or its value is not stated in the religious texts, the judge has to determine it.

5. The burden of punishment is to be shouldered individually. This does not contradict the giving of blood money by someone with a sound mind in case of unintended murder.

6. In case of ambiguity (lawth), swearing has been prescribed. Lawth means the existence of a prior indication or indications that there is a proof that the

p: 164

murdered person has been killed by the defendant or defendants.

Qasamah refers to oaths taken by the plaintiffs—50 oaths in case of premeditated murder and 25 oaths in case of unintentional murder; otherwise, it is the case of lawth according to the primary principle, “Clear evidence lies on the plaintiff while taking oath lies on the accused.” Qasamah is done in this manner: initially, the accused will be requested to bring evidence and if he fails, it is the turn of the victim’s relatives to undergo qasamah.

3. Examples of Legal Principles and Rules

1. Contracts and the like depend on the intention of the contracting parties:

العقود وما یشابها (وما قام مقامها) تتبع القصود.

2. Dissolution of contracts pertains to the components of the contracts’ subject in case the dissolution is possible.

3. To act upon every legitimate condition is obligatory:

﴿یَا أَیُّهَا الَّذِینَ آمَنُواْ أَوْفُواْ بِالْعُقُودِ﴾

“O you who have faith! Keep your agreements.”(1)

المسلمون عند شروطهم إلاّ ما خالف الکتاب أو السنّة.

“The Muslims are attached to their terms except whatever goes against the Book (Qur’an) or the Sunnah.”

4. A condition which goes against the intent of the contract renders this contract invalid:

کل عقد شرط غیه خلاف ما یقتضیه فهو باطل.

5. A crooked condition does not invalidate the whole contract:

الشرط الفاسد لا یفسد العقود.

6. If it is impossible to abide by the meaning of any contract it is invalid:

کل عقد یتعذر الوفاء فهو بمضمونه باطل.

7. The provision in contracts is necessary.

8. Like his life, man’s property is respected:

حرمة ماله کحرمة دمه.

p: 165

9. Reconciliation is permissible and predominant.

“And settle your differences.”(1)

“Reconciliation between Muslims is permissible except in making lawful unlawful and unlawful lawful.”(2)

“Reconciliation between people is permissible.”(3)

10. The one who is deceived by someone should refer to the one who has deceived him:

المغرور یرجع إلی من غرّه.

11. Guarantee transfers the liability for the amount due from the debtor to the guarantor:

ألضامن ناقل.

“The guarantor is a carrier of burden.”

12. Loss of trust of the guarantor through his infringement or falling below the conditions set for a guarantor:

لیس علی المؤتمن ضمان.

13. Whoever spends another person’s property becomes its guarantor:

من أتلف مال الغیر فهو له ضامن.

14. In loan there is no guarantor except loan of gold and silver, or through his infringement or falling below the conditions set for a guarantor.

15. In a wholesome Islamic society, possession of a property by means of control over it is a sign of ownership:

لولا الید لما قام للمسلمین سوق.

16. Anyone who takes something from another person (not through any dealing or as a trust or loan) is the guarantor of it until he returns it to the owner:

علی الید ما أخذت حتّی یؤدّی.

17. The Muslims’ market is proof (hujjah) (in every society in which Islamic

p: 166

laws are acted upon or at least most people follow Islamic laws, the rule in that society is the primacy of sayings, acts and intentions):

لو لم یجز هذا لما قام للمسلمین سوق.

18. Every debt (dayn) is instantaneous (and must be given without any delay) except in particular cases discussed in jurisprudence:

کلّ دین حالّ إلاّ فی موارد یبحث عنها فی الفقه.

19. Debt must absolutely be given:

الدین مقضیّ.

20. The necessity of giving due respite in paying debt:

﴿فَإِنْ کَانَ ذُو عُسْرَةٍ فَنَظِرَةٌ إِلَی مَیْسَرَةٍ.﴾

21. The guarantor must be able to do his or her function:

الزعیم غارم.

22. Just as every item which is a subject of transaction and must be guaranteed in case of its validity, that which invalidates the transaction must also have a guarantor:

ما یضمن بصحیحه یضمن بفاسده.

23. Any item which has an equivalent can be guaranteed by its equivalent and any item which has no equivalent, its price must be given:

المثلی یضمن بالمثل، والقیمی یضمن بالقیمی.

24. In case of death or extinction of the subject of guarantee, the basis of payment is the current value:

منافع الأموال تضمن بالفوت أو بالتفویت المعتبر فی الضمان یوم التلف.

25. The free can neither be bought nor sold:

الحرّ لا یباع.

26. Anyone who possesses a property through negotiations becomes its owner:

من حاز ملک.

27. Anyone who cultivates a barren land becomes its owner:

من أحیا أرضاً میتة فهی له.

p: 167

28. The people are absolutely free to spend their properties:

الناس مسلّطون علی أموالهم.

29. Waiving of rights in relation to a property forfeits one’s ownership of it.

30. The private property is customarily at the disposal of the owner:

من ملک شیئاً من الأرض ملک قراره فی حریمه.

31. The principle is that a person cannot own anything by force except by inheritance and testament (wasiyyah):

لا یدخل فی ملک إنسان شیء قهراً إلاّ الإرث والوصیّة للحمل.

32. The lack of any objective or expedient transaction except on the part of the owner or anyone who is his equivalent:

لا یقع عقد علی عین أَو منفعة إلاّ من مالک أو بحکمه.

33. Any sold item which perished before being possessed by the buyer is considered still owned by the seller:

کلّ مبیع تلف قبل قبضه فهو من مال مبیعه.

34. In any case selling and buying is valid, mortgage is also valid:

کلّما صحّ بیعه صحّ رهنه.

35. Mortgaging is conditioned by receipt:

لا رهن إلاّ مقبوضاً.

36. The usurper must be punished severely except in times of famine and emergency:

الغاصب یؤخذ بأشقّ الأحوال إلاّ فی قحط أو مخمصة.

37. Faithlessness (kufr) and committing murder deprives one of inheritance:

الکفر والقتل یمنعان الإرث.

38. The need for observing envy in obsolete things.

39. Anyone who can directly interfere in a matter can take a proxy in relation to it:

کلّ من صحّ منه المباشر صحّ منه التوکیل.

40. Any endowment (waqf) must be done according to the intention and objective of the endower:

p: 168

الوقوف علی حسب ما یوقفها أهلها.

41. Anyone who owns an item also owns the benefits to be taken from it:

من ملک شیئاً ملک منافعه.

42. If one of two or some business partners wants to sell his share from a shared property, any partner or partners take priority in buying it:

حقّ الشفعة.

43. In writing contracts, the weaker party is supposed to write and have a copy of the contract because there is a stronger possibility of ambiguity and bullying on the part of the stronger party. (Obviously, this is not a general principle or rule, but only applicable in case of removing any possible injustice to be done against the weak.)

44. Guarantee can be canceled by permission:

الضمان یسقط بالإذن.

45. In cases of the possibility of rejection, the one who has the right to do so does not reject it, it shall be regarded as approval:

عدم الردع یکفی فی الإمضاء.

46. Deprivation of a gain which a person may acquire naturally or legally shall be regarded as a loss:

عدم النفع الذی یقتضیه القانون ضرر.

By examining closely the jurisprudential principles and rules, the following two very important conclusions can be drawn:

First conclusion: Islamic jurisprudence has not enacted artificial, unrealistic and irrational limits and frameworks. In other words, Islamic jurisprudence is an open system because every principle or rule it has prescribed for individual and social life is harmonious with the dynamic nature of human life. Moreover, in view of mankind’s movement toward rational life which means natural life, life based on clear evidence and guidance toward the life which is linked with God, the Owner of life and death, these very principles and rules are driving forces toward the abovementioned life.

Second conclusion: By putting human life in the spotlight, the said jurisprudential principles and rules, backed by sublime human morality, make Islamic jurisprudence possess both merits of being a ‘forerunner’ and

p: 169

an ‘adherent’. It is a ‘forerunner’ in the sense that it guarantees inalterable physical and spiritual needs of human life. It is an ‘adherent’ in the sense that it totally acknowledges the open nature of life’s dimensions with the emergence of new subjects and phenomena in relation to nature as well as the introduction of technology. It does not stand in the way of its expansion and diversity, except in cases that disturb dynamic and purposeful human life. For example, producing narcotic drugs,providing the means to incite carnal passions and paving the way for the moral corruption of society that leads to nothing but the feeling of futility in life.

Here, we have no option but to mention a very important point and that is, purely ‘adherent’ laws that have nothing to do with the constructive morality of rational life only regulate the human inclinations for the benefit of collective life (i.e. life devoid of disturbance to fellow human beings). In reality, this is to regulate human beings, unaware of the purposeful life. In order to clarify these two conclusions, we have no option but to examine the qualitative nature of Islamic legal and jurisprudential system in terms of its openness or rigidity.

governing them are currently in motion in a ‘systematic’ manner, as described today. Meanwhile, in this arena of quest of the living and lifeless worlds, the most powerful source of life is that of the human being. By means of the wonderful brain, it is always moving from one state to another. There is no doubt at all that like the phenomenon of life, man, in whatever natural and social state (political, religious, moral, legal, cultural, and historical) he may be, is subject to innumerable laws.

From this observable state of affairs, we arrive at the definite conclusion that by having intrinsic active power and unlimited potential, man always moves through the highly systematic force that transforms the natural and conventional systems (in which he lives). Yes, had it not been for this sublime and transformative force, he would certainly have been extinguished within the complex systems hundreds, nay thousands, of centuries ago. While passing through the obstacles of the closed systems of nature and aspects of life, man preserves the basic principles of its identity.

His inalterable needs in the four types of relationship (man’s relationship with himself, God, the universe, and his fellow human beings) do not undergo any fundamental change. That which changes is the emergence of secondary and less important needs, or the artificial needs that are imposed by elements outside the ‘rational human life’ into the realm of collective human life.

p: 171

p: 172

Granted that sublime human principles and excellent morality will remain the same, in which period or situation would personalities like Salman al-Farsī, Abū Dharr al-Ghiffarī, Malik al-Ashtar, ‘Ammar ibn Yasīr, Miqdad ibn Aswad, Uways al-Qarnī, Ibn al-Tayhan, Kumayl ibn Ziyad al-Nakha’ī, and hundreds of others, not be able to live?

When sublime human principles are removed from the scene, and human society turns into a factory of unconscious, helpless screws, nuts and bolts, there will be no room for Abraham, the Friend, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah, Mūsa ibn ‘Imran, ‘Īsa ibn Maryam, ‘Alī ibn Abī Talib (‘a), and those excellent men and women who attained a station within the Axis of Perfection.

Obviously, inventions can help a lot in discovering the things beneficial to man when advancing human identity in the four types of relationship and not promoting narcissism, hedonism and hegemony. A jurisprudential rule states: Cooperating to provide whatever is needed in the system of a wholesome social life is a collective responsibility (wajib kifa’ī); in case its realization requires the efforts of some individuals, it is a personal obligation (wajib ‘aynī) for each one of them.

Two extremely important factors are necessary for the encouragement of innovating and acquiring further knowledge about the universe:

First factor: Qur’anic verses, authentic traditions and the dictate of reason make up this factor. This is especially so if we consider the authentic traditions which highlight the necessity of reflecting on our experience to unravel new realities. According to the Commander of the Faithful ‘Alī (‘a)

وفی التجارب علم مستأنف.

“Through experiences (experiments), [new horizons of] knowledge shall be acquired.”(1)

Second factor: A close examination of scientific methods and incessant discoveries by Muslims, from the latter part of the second century up to the middle of the fifth century AH, at the time of the dark Middle Ages in the West.

p: 174

Question 2

Do all religious values originate from jurisprudence, or does ethics play a role as well?

Question 3

Can jurisprudence and religion assume the responsibility of managing society, or should human knowledge take control of this management?

Answer: Since the two questions above deal with a single issue, we shall address them together. The most fundamental factor giving rise to such questions is the lack of understanding the religion or jurisprudence of Islam. As such, although the meaning of jurisprudence has been clarified in our previous discourses, here we shall briefly define jurisprudence again in its general sense. Jurisprudence means knowledge of the laws pertaining to all human actions and avoidances in both the physical and spiritual realms, in connection with God, as basically substantiated by the Qur’an, the Sunnah, consensus and reason. These proofs bespeak of what is good and evil for the ‘rational life’ without which it is impossible to achieve otherworldly success. So, in reality, all knowledge—be it physical or mental, natural or conventional, or ideological is encompassed by God’s all-embracing law. Rūmī used the term “jurisprudence of the Sublime God” (fiqh Allah al-akbar) in the first book of Mathnawī indicating the vastness of the scope of jurisprudence, for he expressed therein his ideas while seriously keeping in view the exegeses of Qur’anic verses. The late Sabziwarī says that the Mathnawī embarks on giving a commentary of the content of the Qur’an and around 600 moral, mystical and psychological traditions, as well as the basic principles of knowledge and learning in the realm of “what it is” and “what ought to be”.

By closely examining the dimensions of the laws of Islam, it can be proved that, all actions and aspects of man’s rational life in the individual and social domains which contribute to his worldly and otherworldly felicity are encompassed by jurisprudence in its true sense, and not only limited to dealing with man’s personal relationship with God, i.e. acts of worship (‘ibadat).

Therefore, Islamic jurisprudence consists of the following sections:

1. Jurisprudence on the acts of worship;

2. Jurisprudence on personal conditions;

p: 175

3. Jurisprudence on business transactions, contracts and obligations;

4. Moral jurisprudence;

5. Mystical jurisprudence;

6. Political jurisprudence;

7. Technological jurisprudence;

8. Jurisprudence on international relations;

9. Cultural jurisprudence;

10. Jurisprudence on management;

11. Jurisprudence of jihad and defense;

12. Jurisprudence on sciences;

13. Jurisprudence on discoveries;

14. Jurisprudence on rights;

15. Judicial jurisprudence;

16. Jurisprudence on resistance against oppression and corruption;

17. Jurisprudence on resistance against inappropriate practices;

18. Jurisprudence on encouraging and enjoining what is appropriate;

19. Jurisprudence on prospective trends; and

20. Jurisprudence on the information received about whatever transpires in the world.

In order to prove the justifiability of this categorization, it is essential to consider the following proofs:

First proof: “I was not sent but to perfect excellent morality.” This tradition has been narrated in numerous instances from the Holy Prophet s. This tradition presents the purpose behind the mission of the Holy Prophet s as perfection and completion of morality and self-refinement of the people. Therefore, morality is a very important segment of the prophets’ mission, which is within the scope of jurisprudence in its general sense.

Second proof: In numerous verses, the Noble Qur’an regarded “teaching the Book and wisdom” as the purpose of the mission of the Holy

p: 176

Prophet s:

﴿هُوَ الَّذِی بَعَثَ فِی الْأُمِّیِّینَ رَسُولًا مِّنْهُمْ یَتْلُو عَلَیْهِمْ آیَاتِهِ وَیُزَکِّیهِمْ وَیُعَلِّمُهُمُ الْکِتَابَ وَالْحِکْمَةَ﴾

“It is He who sent to the unlettered [people] an apostle from among themselves, to recite to them His signs, to purify them, and to teach them the Book and wisdom.”(1)

Clearly, the contents of the Divine Book and meaning of wisdom undertake organizing the welfare of man’s rational life, and not only some acts of worship and their quantitative and qualitative features.

Third proof: In the first sermon of Nahj al-Balaghah, the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) thus says about the prophets’ mission:

وَوَاتَرَ إِلَیْهِمْ أَنْبِیاءَهُ، لِیَسْتَأْدُوهُمْ مِیثَاقَ فِطْرَتِهِ، وَیُذَکِّرُوهُمْ مَنْسِیَّ نِعْمَتِهِ، وَیَحْتَجُّوا عَلَیْهِمْ بَالتَّبْلِیغِ، وَیُثِیرُوا لَهُمْ دَفَائِنَ الْعُقُولِ، وَیُرُوهُمْ آیَاتِ الْمَقْدِرَةِ. مِنْ سَقْفٍ فَوْقَهُمْ مَرْفُوعٍ، وَمِهَادٍ تَحْتَهُمْ مَوْضُوعٍ، وَمَعَایِشَ تُحْیِیهِمْ.

“Then Allah sent His Messengers toward them to make them fulfill the pledges of His creation, to recall His bounties, to exhort them by preaching, to unveil before them the hidden virtues of wisdom, and show them the signs of His Omnipotence; namely, the sky, which is raised over them, the earth, that is placed beneath them, and the means of living, that sustains them.”(2)

The correct meaning of Islamic jurisprudence is given here. Of course, to identify the subjects, relations and ways of conforming subjects to particular cases in various sections of jurisprudence is the responsibility of pious authorities and experts. After them [in this responsibility] are the jurisprudents who engage in deducing laws and rulings from the sources of jurisprudence.

Question 4

Are religion and jurisprudence perfect, and is only ones understanding of them imperfect?

Answer: This question resembles this one: Is the universe a systematic manufactory, and only our scientific and philosophical perceptions of it are defective?

p: 177

Yes, just as the universe is not identical with our perception of it, it is clear that religion and jurisprudence are not identical with our perception or understanding of them. But there is one thing that should not be forgotten and that is, since perfection is laden with positive value and imperfection (defect) with negative value, academically it seems more appropriate and correct to use the word ‘limitation’ or ‘relativity’ with respect to our perceptions of religion and jurisprudence. This is because, of the short span of human life, and the limitations of scientific means at the disposal of man. This limitation and relativity has been accepted in all branches of knowledge, including philosophy and even mysticism (‘irfan). This expression is like a common slogan written in large letters and displayed at the façade of a magnificent palace: “Everything is known to everyone while everyone is yet to be born.” (That is, so much knowledge and learning has been entrusted by the past generation to the future generation.) Mawlana (Rūmī) says,

هین بگو که ناطقه جو ﻣﻲکَنَد تا به قرنی بعدِ ما آبی رسد

گرچه هر قرنی سخن آری بُوَد لیک گفتِ سالفان یاری بود

Come, speak [O my soul]! For the Logos is digging a channel, to the end that some water may reach a generation after us.

Although [in] every generation there is one who brings the word [of God], yet the sayings of them that have gone before are helpful.(1)

The Divine Revelation, through the great prophets, has presented to mankind an overview of the principles of the universe and the bases of jurisprudence, while scientific discoveries make clear the levels, dimensions and aspects of the insignificant corner of the universe we are located in. As acknowledged by scientists, compared with what is unknown to us, what we know of the universe is insignificant. Yet, all the scientists and philosophers still undertake activities, knowing well that the universe is not identical with what is known about it, and that they will never succeed in knowing all about it. They are still so busy working in their respective fields that it is as if they can see the entire universe within the confines of their respective fields!

p: 178

The factors that stand in the way of knowing all dimensions of all components of the entire universe are as follows:

1. The use of sensory perceptions while taking into account their structural limitations, such as eyes and ears;

2. Interference of intrinsic features of the means and tools for expanding knowledge; for example, telescopes, microscopes and other equipments and tools;

3. Specific aim in knowing things limits man’s perspective on the universe;

4. Premeditated general principles, which consciously or unconsciously foster and justify acquired pieces of knowledge;

5. Premeditated specific principles influence man’s special relationships in choosing goals and means of knowledge.

In seeking the help of religious revelation, which also formally recognizes scientific recognition, there is an extreme tranquility not generated by any other knowledge and action. In usual scientific recognition of the universe, human beings acquire two things: (1) some components of the universe for the needs of physical life, and (2) delight or stupefaction with such limited recognition with some levels and components of the universe, which can never reach the tranquility-giving absolute degree.

Question 5

Is it jurisprudence that ‘seizes’ (qabz), ‘expands’ (bast) and gives form to life, or is it the form of life that ‘seizes’ and ‘expands’ jurisprudence (and schools of law)?

Answer: In view of discussions in some contemporary writings, it means presenting changes in the general sense, and not qabz and bast in the special sense of the terms. The terms qabz and bast were found for the first time in a tradition by Imam al-Sadiq (‘a). The tradition is as follows: Yūnus ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman narrates on the authority of Hamzah ibn Muhammad al-Tayyar that Imam al-Sadiq (‘a) said: “There is no qabz or bast except in what God, the Exalted, has willed, predestined and inflicted.”(1)

In another tradition, Fazalah ibn Ayyūb narrates on the authority of Hamzah ibn Muhammad al-Tayyar that Imam al-Sadiq (‘a) said: “There is nothing in

p: 179

the commandments and prohibitions of God in which there is qabz and bast except in which God, the Exalted and Glorious inflicts a decree (as a trial).”(1)

The first tradition has not determined a specific subject for qabz and bast. As such, it can be said that it includes anything in which qabz and bast is possible. In the second tradition, the subject of qabz and bast has been specified and that is, the commandments and prohibitions (laws and duties) of God.

This tradition can be interpreted in two ways: matters from God that somehow pertain to man’s being—whether ontological matters (umūr-e takwīnī) such as, specific fashion of man’s creation and his relationship with the universe; or, legislative matters (umūr-e tashrī‘ī), such as, the laws and duties prescribed by God. Whether in their state of qabz or bast, they are based upon Divine decree and will, as well as, a trial for His servants.

There are three possibilities about qabz and bast:

1. Brevity and elaboration;

2. Union and dissension;

3. Obstruction and adversity, and opening and welfare

The second way of interpreting the tradition is that there is no Divine commandment and prohibition in which there is brevity and elaboration, or obstruction and opening, except that, which God, the Blessed and Exalted, has set as a trial or test for His servants. In general, considering that the Divine commandments and prohibitions are also related to man’s life for perfection in whose substance and purport God has set a trial or decree for His servants. The meaning stated for the tradition has nothing to do with what can be seen in some contemporary writings.

Now, we shall embark on answering the question.

On one side is the advanced jurisprudence which, in activating the positive talents of human beings, prepares them to acquire its potential benefits, although there have been no changes and alterations in the realm of life due to the development and advancement in science, technology and communications. For example, the in-depth acquaintance with the Qur’an of the great figures throughout the centuries and periods is indeed impossible

p: 180

for the common people. The inference of Qur’anic verses of such men as Farabī, Ibn Sīna, Khwajah Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tusī, Ibn Rushd,(1) Jalal al-Din Rūmī, Sadr al-Mu’allihīn (Mulla Sadra), and Mīr Damad can never be compared with that of common people. These great men played a vital role in founding useful knowledge in the present world. At the time when the informed scholars and jurisprudents of the past centuries were concerned with the rights of animals in jurisprudence, categorically mentioning them in books of jurisprudence like Jawahir al-Kalam,(2) there had been no news about the advancement of science, technology and communications.(3) During the third, fourth and a bit of the fifth century AH, Muslims took both the East and the West as the arena of their search, such that Oriental and Western historians—even those who did not believe in any religion—acknowledged that Muslim societies had been the forerunners in research, innovation and intellectual pursuits in the world. This activity of the Muslims emanated from within them as indicated in the book, Sarguzasht-e Andīsheh, for, although they examined and researched on Greek philosophy, in empirical sciences, they acquired great advancements without imitating and following other nations and societies. These became the foundations of important scientific and technological discoveries and exerted a far-reaching influence on the West. Therefore, ‘advanced’ religious jurisprudence played a vital role in the advancement of sciences, worldview, technology, and other principles of an advanced culture.

Meanwhile, the emergence of new issues and happenings can also contribute to the comparative development of jurisprudence and laws. The many books about recent issues which are currently written and in which principles, rules, explicit texts and ammendation of definite criteria are utilized, bear witness to this claim. So far, this is a trend, which no authority has even doubted.

p: 181

In view of what has been said, it can be concluded that ‘adherent’ jurisprudence and laws, ‘advanced’ jurisprudence and laws, and ‘adherent’ and ‘advanced’ jurisprudence and laws must be distinguished from one another:

1. In the ‘adherent’ jurisprudence and laws which claim that they are consistent with the desires, way of thinking and attitudes of the people, the answer is in the affirmative. The changes and modifications are caused by the changes in social relations and emergence of new phenomena and activities, provided that this claim [about changes] is exactly correct.

2. Meanwhile, the ‘advanced’ jurisprudence and laws maintain that the criterion for organizing social relations is the discretion of legal and juristic authorities because the desires, way of thinking and attitudes of the common people not supported by rational principles, cannot identify nor organize mankind’s material and spiritual felicity. For this reason, as long as changes in social relations do not duly affect the system of jurisprudence and laws as far as the views of authorities are concerned, they cannot have any effect in the transformation of the said system.

A close examination and survey of the jurisprudential and legal systems throughout history reveal that none of the two models (‘adherent’ and ‘advanced’) has ever existed in the absolute sense. No one doubts that after the Renaissance in the West, philosophers and social scientists in general have influenced laws and legislations a lot, by exercising freedom of expression. As preeminent thinkers of the time, their statements impelled the people, consciously or unconsciously, to accept such notions as usury (riba), libertarian sexual relationship, legally incorporating them on the basis of people’s consent and approval! On the other hand, it is impossible for a legal system, which disregards the innate desires of people and the emergence of new relations to be absolutely ‘advanced’. In line with this, you can observe changes in some socialist laws such as those of the family.

3. The third model of jurisprudence and laws is both ‘advanced’ and ‘adherent’. In view of the needs of mankind that remain inalterable with the passage of time amidst changes in science, social relations and others, this model is ‘advanced’ and in view of the emergence of changes in subjects and applications of phenomena and aspects of life as well as the appearance of more recent relations, it is ‘adherent’.

From a jurisprudential or legal perspective, the religion of Islam belongs to

p: 182

the third model. That is, in view of the Islamic jurisprudence or laws’ adherence to the subjects and manifestations of life as well as the set of rational principles approved by Islam, it is ‘adherent’. And, because of the rulings and laws related to the inalterable material and spiritual needs of people, it is ‘advanced’. These rulings and laws encompass all issues pertaining to the four types of relationship, which are innate and permanent.

Question 6

What are the things that give way to defects and shortcomings in the legal and juristic systems?

Answer: If the identity of a juristic and legal system has come into being on the basis of divine revelation, sound reason and natural disposition, no element can tarnish it and no defect or damage can find its way into it. No defect or damage can penetrate the real results of science and any change in the result due to the change in circumstances is not a defect. This is because the necessity for change and reconsideration of opinion on issues, principles and rules due to the emergence of [new] happenings, subjects and applications is not a defect or shortcoming. It rather affirms the capability of a juristic and legal system and is considered a proof of the system’s resilience and greatness.

The ways of penetration of defects and shortcoming into juristic and legal systems are related to things outside the essence of the system, such as:

1. The manner of benefiting from them;

2. Digression in expressions, terms and precedence, in the sense that any view or opinion, which comes first, is given more weight by the juriprudents and legalists!

3. Extreme belief on the value of one’s views and inference, and inattention and negligence of the emerging changes in subjects, relations and the like;

4. The spirit of extreme submission (not a feeling of rational respect) to prominent figures in law and jurisprudence;

5. Movement through an exclusive professional channel (understanding in jurisprudence and law) that jurisprudents and legalists rely more on jurisprudential and legal disposition, without paying attention to the causes, motives and inclinations of the two (jurisprudential and legal). Of course, since veracity (‘adalah), God-wariness (taqwa) and prominence in

p: 183

knowledge are conditions of being a jurisprudent and legalist in Islam, one in charge of the said two fields can volitionally be the factor for the penetration of this defect or shortcoming.

Question 7

Is the form of human life the product of a legal (jurisprudential) system alone, or are there other things other than law and jurisprudence that contribute in the formation of human life?

Answer: If “the form of human life” here refers to the physical appearances of life which human beings have shown throughout history in different societies, it is clear that by removing conflicts and contradictions among human inclinations, legal systems have been considerably effective in shaping human life. In other aspects, however, the influence of legal system upon human life is not to that extent. And the reasons for this can be sought in the following factors:(1)

1. People’s extremely powerful element of selfishness;

2. For the selfish holders of power laws and other obligatory arrangements are mere ‘cobwebs’ that catch only the weakest of animals, but not Hobbesian Leviathans,(2) or Nietzschean/Machiavelian ‘expediencies’.

And if “the form of human life” refers to the general course of life throughout history, we must say that there are different factors—both independent and dependent—involved along this process. Discourses on the philosophy of history, particularly what pertains to the ‘agent of motion in history’, undertake the explanation and interpretation of these different factors. Common (non-Islamic) legal systems function like filters for the preservation of the system and form of life. As such, throughout history, due to the emergence of revolutions, which topple down previous systems and give way to new systems, old filters go and give way to new ones. Other matters come into being in history, transforming legal sytems, and thus, changing the form and course of human life in turn.

p: 184

Now, we shall deal with the effects of Islamic jurisprudence in shaping human life while keeping its definition in view. There is no doubt that every Muslim—both in the individual and collective sense—benefits from jurisprudential laws in shaping life as much as possible. It is explicitly recorded in history that Muslims in different societies have been committed to act upon their beliefs and jurisprudential laws, which the ruling elite in those societies do not believe in and regard them as hostile to their political systems, and in many cases, they deprive the people of different aspects of social life. This thing happens in some neighboring countries and also happened in our society before.

Question 8

Are legal (and jurisprudential) systems capable of clashing with natural realities and laws, or should these systems be consistent with these realities and laws?

Answer: If legal and jurisprudential systems, in general, go against natural laws and realities, they will definitely go in abeyance and cease to function. In the parlance of logic, this major premise is axiomatic but the main question of the minor premise is the above proof and that is, can legal (and jurisprudential) systems in general endure while clashing with natural realities and laws? Obviously, the answer is in the negative. The crux of the matter is that we must have some explanation about natural realities and laws to know the source of the prohibition or order while harmonizing legal (and jurisprudential) systems with natural realities and laws.

Natural realities and laws encompass all events, phenomena and laws. At the time of their emergence, they can destroy natural human life; for example, earthquakes, floods, epidemics, etc. Obviously, in order to save itself, mankind is compelled to struggle against the realities and laws that bring the elements of its destruction. If there is somebody who urges the people to submit and not struggle against natural realities and laws, some sensible person must deal with him.

Now, this question comes to the fore: Is the power of human-like beasts something unnatural? Yes, the penetrating eyes of Napoleon Bonaparte(1)

p: 185

whose glances could make a brave soldier forget his words were something natural. The ingenuity of savage Asian conquerors like Genghis Khan,(1) Hulagu Khan,(2) Tamerlane(3) and bloodthirsty European butchers like Nero,(4) Caligula(5) and Cesare Borgia,(6) were also natural phenomena. This does not mean that they had freely developed the essence of ingenuity, or found it and inculcated it in their minds.(7)

At any rate, in a bid to destroy all original cultures and advanced civilizations, it is enough for you to say, “O builders of advanced cultures and civilizations! Sit idly and do not resist natural realities and laws and let these destructive forces run their courses.”

Meanwhile, all social scientists, those who are relatively more familiar with all dimensions—physical and spiritual—of the human being, know that just as nature or, in general, the universe—in which the human being is included—has realities and laws of its own, the human soul also has its own

p: 186

realities and laws. It is clear that the most fundamental condition for logical understanding of natural realities and laws is [correct] understanding of the realities and laws pertaining to the human soul. Now, if the selfish nature of a person says, “I am the goal while others are means,” will moral, legal and religious laws not take any action against this by relying on the vicious notion: “The scorpion’s sting, through optional grudge, is with human beings. But, it is not the dictate of its nature to sting and endanger human lives! Set aside the nature, and let it follow its own course.” It was the same baseless statement, which was once the slogan of French Physiocrats(1): “Take your seat and graciously place your life at the disposal of the factors of death!” It is never so; the truth is as follows:

نیش عقرب نه از ره کین است اقتضای طبیعتش این است

The scorpion’s sting is not through spite.

This is the dictate of its nature.

No one can deny the fact that just as nature has its own laws, the human soul also has its own laws. Now, we shall point out some of these laws:(2)

1. The nature of the human soul necessitates subsistence and not deterioration and extinction. To prepare the human soul for a felicitous subsistence, expression of selfishness, extreme profiteering, hedonism, and self-interest is the first law. Any event, phenomenon or natural law, which opposes this vital law that guarantees eternal life, must be checked in favor of the law of “the soul in its general sense”.

2. The human soul yearns for the attainment of the lofty goal of life.

3. The human soul ardently desires to understand the relationship with itself that disciplines and refines it for sublimation of its pure natural life, common with other animals, to the “rational life”, whose end is to be situated in the Axis of Sublime Divine Perfection.

p: 187

4. If the human soul wishes to attain the station of harmony and solidarity with fellow human beings, who are also parts of the caravan toward felicity, it must achieve the rank of “one equals to all and all equal to one”.

Disregarding these primordial laws of the human soul vis-à-vis the realities and laws of nature is tantamount to a fatal campaign against the self. Now, we shall explicitly state the gist of the reply to the question, thus:

If the jurisprudential systems show any sign of contradiction with natural realities and laws; if those natural things confront the established realities and facts of human principles, naturally those natural things (natural events and laws) must be checked in favor of the human principles. And, if the jurisprudential systems become so static that they lack the necessary measure to deal with natural events, realities and laws, there is a need for their reform. Even in this case, however, generalization does not solve anything or stimulate any progress. In fact, they must be dealt with on a case-to-case basis and be affirmed as clear manifestations of the contradiction of a certain legal and jurisprudential system with natural realities and laws. [Thereafter,] you must strive for the solution.

The duty of both the jurisprudents and the natural scientists is to always enter their respective fields with a fresh perception, understanding and research. It is not that only jurisprudence and law are not supposed to grapple with natural realities and laws, but rather natural and social sciences are also not supposed to consider themselves authoritative—in the name of scientism—to express an opinion on jurisprudence, law and other social sciences by means of a probability, supposition, hypothesis, or theory.

We say “in the name of scientism” because in the past two centuries, hundreds of theories, hypotheses and presumptions have been presented by thinkers in the arena of human knowledge, and the narrowminded and ignoramuses have regarded them as “science”. In the end, however, with the discovery of their refutations, they have been thrown out of the domain of definitive sciences. With this distinction, it can be proved that so far there has been no jurisprudential and legal principle or law that goes against any established scientific fact (not theory, hypothesis or presumption).

Question 9

Does the Islamic legal system allow any type of legal system to emerge?

Answer: The Islamic legal system is like the Islamic philosophical system.

p: 188

By keeping its own worldview and essential presumptions in relation to the four types of relationship, this philosophical system has the capacity to offer tens, and perhaps in some cases, hundreds of philosophical and epistemological tendencies, and to accommodate any kind of idea, principle or rule expressed on the basis of reason and pure intrinsic conceptions. This is because as affirmed in these discourses, the Islamic legal system revolves around the axis of “rational human life”. For instance, since the vehicle and hundreds of other amenities entered the scene of human life, tens of principles and rules have been discussed, Islam has never adopted an opposite stance against these principles and rules. However, that Islam could accommodate tens, and perhaps in some cases, hundreds of philosophical tendencies because of its depth and vastness is more than enough to require a detailed reasoning.

Question 10

Is it possible for the outside world to go to the extent of rendering the Islamic legal system totally inefficient and replace it with a totally different legal-jurisprudential system?

Answer: If the physiological and psychological makeup of man is so transformed that man with his immense potential ceases to exist, it is clear that in such a time the Islamic legal system will cease to function absolutely, because there will be no human being whose legal-jurisprudential system it is supposed to regulate.

گفت قاضی ثبّت العرش ای پسر تا بر او نقشی کنیم از خیر و شر

The Judge said [to the Sufi], “Make the roof firm, O son,

So that I may decorate it with good and evil(1)

You are not supposed to discuss the ineffectivity of the Islamic law and jurisprudence as merely the result of natural and technological transformation, change in human relations, and the like. You can also observe the ineffectivity of the Islamic law and jurisprudence prior to those changes, when the devastating storm of utilitarianism, lust, hedonism, and greed for power crushed the human lives in the ocean of history with the rocks of the said proclivities, shattering them and leaving no trace of

p: 189

humanity. Just like bolts and nuts of a lifeless machine in the hands of selfish power-worshippers, tens of millions of people plunged into luxury and pleasure, like unconscious and unthinking dolls leaping on their hands. It was because of the possible coming of such a day that Einstein,(1) one of the famous contemporary figures, had warned of a third world war, saying that if this war occurs, the world and its inhabitants will be annihilated. With utmost clarity, he also said, “Will you feel bad about the extinction of the human race?” The story is as follows:

“In 1949, Einstein thus wrote about his meeting with an American leader: ‘I was recently discussing with a smart American figure who was apparently a good man. I reminded him that the menace of a new war threatens humanity and if such a war occurs, the human race will likely be wiped out and only a transnational organization can prevent such a menace. But, with utmost surprise, I heard his reply, ‘For what reason do you oppose the extinction of the human race to such an extent?’’”(2)

If we examine the succeeding words of Einstein in interpreting his interlocutor’s reply, we will find out that one of the main reasons that induced him to give such a shocking reply was the same depreciation of human life and mental activities that emanate from the misuse of the bounties God has bestowed to His servants in this world. People have totally crushed spiritual mirth from human life and only live on the basis of fatalism, hedonism or libertianism. In continuation, Einstein says:

“Such a harsh and categorical reply indicates inward suffering and outward affliction which is a product of the modern world. In my opinion, this reply is that of a person who has strived hard to excel but failed and has lost even the hope to succeed. This reply bespeaks of a painful seclusion from which all human beings suffer.”(3)

p: 190

Question 11

In your opinion, to what extent can religion interfere in temporal affairs? Can it be said that religion has drawn the overall lines of material prosperity, leaving man to himself with respect to the minute details?

Answer: It is clear that the schools—both religious and non-religious—that draw the lines of the dos and don’ts of man in the realms of both corporeal life and eternal life pertain to general matters and not to particular facts and issues. But, the burden of identifying this general guideline and applying it to particulars cases lies on the people. It is for this reason that we say that the religion of Islam has generally both aspects of ‘advancement’ and ‘adherence’. This religion pays attention to all beliefs, laws and duties related to the permanent material and spiritual needs of man. Given its aspect of ‘advancement’ and the regulation of permanent material and spiritual needs, it brings human beings to perfection, but in regards to the details, subjects and choice on the ways of living (provided that they do not against reason and the established Islamic rules), it has approved the rational choices of people. In today’s jargon, it has the aspect of ‘adherence’ and for this reason, Islam has essentially its own innovative and constructive quality, which necessitates its being perpetual.

God’s absolute justice requires that, whatever potential human progress needs in the “rational life” in this world and the eternal life in the Hereafter, the guideline of Islam in the realms of material life and eternal abode is perfect. And, if ever there is a person or a society which lacks such potential, for whatever reason, no defect whatsoever can be attributed to the perfect guideline of Islam.

Question 12

Ibn Khaldūn said that in order to have an average or moderate society, there is no need for prophets, and in turn, for religion, and history shows that people who had no prophets were not incapable or inept in leading their lives. Thus, anyone who insists that only under the aegis of religious thought that mundane prosperity could be ensured only expresses his own religious conviction. But, if a person expresses his opinion from outside religion, he will find it to be inconsistent with historical facts, rather, discover the opposite. That is, there were nonreligious nations that were able to manage themselves well and if ever they had problems, these were common human problems, which were not caused by irreligiosity and the lack of religion’s

p: 191

supervision. I want to know your opinion regarding this belief of Ibn Khaldūn.

Answer: First, we must examine the statements of Ibn Khaldūn in this regard. In Al-Muqaddimah, he thus says:

“The weapons [naturally] made for the defence of human beings against the aggressiveness of dumb animals do not suffice… Thus, something else is needed for defence against the aggressiveness of human beings toward each other… The person who exercises a restraining influence, therefore, must be one of them. He must dominate them and have power and authority over them, so that no one of them will be able to attack another. This is the meaning of royal authority. It has thus become clear that royal authority is a natural quality of man, which is absolutely necessary for mankind. The philosophers mention that it also exists among certain dumb animals, such as the bees and the locusts. One discerns among them the existence of authority and obedience to a leader. They follow one who is distinguished as their leader by his natural characteristics and body. However, outside of human beings, these things exist as the result of natural disposition and divine guidance, and not as the result of an ability to think or to administrate. The philosophers go further. They attempt to give logical proof of the existence of prophethood and to show that prophethood is a natural quality of man. In this connection, they carry the argument to its ultimate consequences and say that human beings absolutely require some authority to exercise a restraining influence. They go on to say that such restraining influence exists through the religious law ordained by God and revealed to mankind by a human being. He is distinguished from the rest of mankind by special qualities of divine guidance that God gave him, in order that he might find the others submissive to him and ready to accept what he says. Eventually, the existence of an authority among them and over them becomes a fact that is accepted without the slightest disapproval or dissent. This proposition of the philosophers is not logical, as one can see. Existence and human life can materialize without [the existence of prophethood and religious law] through injunctions, which a person in authority may devise on his own or with the help of a group, that enables him to force the others to follow him wherever he wants to go. People who have a [divinely revealed]

p: 192

book and who follow the prophets are few in number in comparison with the Zoroastrians who have none. The latter constitute the majority of the world’s inhabitants. Still, they have possessed dynasties and monuments, not to mention life itself. They still possess these things at this time in the intemperate zones in the north and the south. This is in contrast with human life in the state of anarchy, with no one to exercise a restraining influence. That would be impossible. This shows that the philosophers are wrong when they assume that prophethood exists by necessity. The existence of prophethood is not required by logic. Its [necessary character] is indicated by the religious law, as was the belief of the early Muslims. God gives success and guidance.”(1)

There are weak points in the statements of Ibn Khaldūn the most important of which are the following:

1. Ibn Khaldūn regarded divine guidance as essential for the animals rather than human beings, who have so much potential. He considered human beings needless of divine guidance, or he regarded the guidance endowed to other creatures as also sufficient for human beings. However, because of his extremely diverse potential and faculties, man’s need for special guidance is more pressing.

2. Ibn Khaldūn said, “This proposition of the philosophers is not logical, as one can see. Existence and human life can materialize without [the existence of prophethood and religious law].” He must indeed be reminded that the goal of human life cannot be summed up in a few days of eating and drinking, sleeping, anger, and lust. If man is left to himself, he would not give up carnal desires and sensual life in order to attain the lofty goal of life, which is to be situated in the Axis of Divine Perfection. Man’s movement toward “rational life,” (tayyibah), life grounded on clear evidence or linked with God (“My life and my death are all for the sake of Allah, the Lord of all the worlds”(2)) is not possible without intellection and divine law.

p: 193

3. Ibn Khaldūn has committed an amazing historical mistake which is beyond explanation. He said, “People who have a [divinely revealed] book and who follow the prophets are few in number in comparison with the Zoroastrians who have none. The latter constitute the majority of the world’s inhabitants.”

First, to have fire-temples in Persia, China and India does not make the Zoroastrians the majority of the world’s inhabitants. Second, as we read in books on comparative religion, the established theory about the Zoroastrians is that they have a religion and their prophet is Zoroaster (Zartusht) and their sacred scripture is called the Avesta. Of course, the complete details of this religion and the history of emergence of Zoroaster are considerably unclear. What is certain is that the Zoroasters believe in two sources that regulate the universe, viz. Yazdan (representing good and light) and Ahriman (representing evil and darkness). They also acknowledge the existence of angels with whom they seek closeness. They regard simple elements, particularly fire, as sacred, linking all creatures to the Supreme Being. They have a scripture and perform a specific ritual of worship. In sum, Zoroastrianism is a religion and for this reason, it is officially recognized in Muslim countries. Regarding Ibn Khaldūn’s statements, it is possible that what he meant was the notion of divine grace whose manifestation, among many others, according to the theologians (mutakallimīn), is the sending down of the prophets, and not justice that necessitates rational duty.

4. In Chapter 51, Ibn Khaldūn said something contradicting this notion. He thus said:

“We have mentioned before in more than one place that human social organization is something necessary. It is what is meant by “civilization” which we have been discussing. (People) in any social organization must have someone who exercises a restraining influence and rules them and to whom recourse may be had. His rule over them is sometimes based upon a divinely revealed religious law. They are obliged to submit to it in view of their belief in reward and punishment in the other world, (things that were indicated) by the person who brought them (their religious law). Sometimes, (his rule is based) upon rational politics. People are obliged to submit to it in view of the reward they expect from the ruler after he has become acquainted with what is good for them. The first (type of rule) is useful for this world and for the other world, because the lawgiver

p: 194

knows the ultimate interest of the people… The second (type of rule) is useful only for this world… Now, the afore-mentioned rational politics may be of two types. The first type of rational politics may concern itself with the (public) interest in general, and with the ruler’s interest in connection with the administration of his realm, in particular. This was the politics of the Persians. It is something related to philosophy. God made this type of politics superfluous for us in Islam at the time of the caliphate. The religious laws take its place in connection with both general and special interests, for they also include the maxims (of the philosophers) and the rules of royal authority… Muslim rulers, however, practice this type of politics in accordance with the requirements of the Muslim religious law, as much as they are able to. Therefore, the political norms here are a mixture of religious laws and ethical rules, norms that are natural in social organization together with a certain necessary concern for strength and group feeling. Examples to be followed in (the practice of) this (kind of politics) are, in the first place, the religious law, and then, the maxims of the philosophers and the way of life of rulers (of the past).”(1)

In our opinion, these words of Ibn Khaldūn constitute a totally correct belief. It is clear that life anchored in religion compared to the one anchored in pure intellection (if it is possible at all) is more comprehensive.

Question 13

It seems that the religious framework is indeed universal and perfect in the sense that it ensures both prosperity in the world and felicity in the Hereafter. But, life anchored in nonreligious policy largely manages mundane life. Even then, it is not clear whether this management is identical with worldly prosperity or not. Moreover, there is no guarantee if the otherworldly felicity is ensured or not for a person.

Human life is a uniform reality consisting of two stages; viz. this world and the Hereafter, and to be more precise, two domains, viz. prior to death and after death. These two stages are not of the same width but of the same

p: 195

length; man’s life in the Hereafter is the crystallization and inward dimension of his life in this world, and by considering the inward effects, religion manages and guides man’s individual and social life, which the human intellect is incapable of doing without the guidance of religion. Therefore, one cannot rely on mere schemes of the human intellect, in ensuring the individual and social prosperity in this world with the otherworldly felicity of human beings, without reliance on religious guidance, except in cases in which the religion itself has allowed us to follow rational guidance.

I would like to ask another question. Some empirical philosophers of religion in the West believe that if religion is really meant for mundane prosperity, this claim can be tested in this world, but if it is also meant for otherworldly felicity, this claim of religion cannot be tested in this world because no one has seen the Hereafter. Sir, what can you say about this?

Answer: The laboratory for this claim of bestowing felicity in the Hereafter consists of man’s intellect, conscience and pure nature (fitrah) that can distinguish baseless things linked with fleeting animalistic desires from facts that are compatible with the perfect and progress-seeking essence of man. Felicity in the eternal world belongs to those who earn the merit in this world to be situated in the Divine Threshold in the eternal world. It belongs to those who spend their lives in this world craving for perfection by means of organizing and rectifying the four types of relationship. Thus, any religion or set of beliefs that explains to the people the various channels of this feeling and ardent desire has ensured their felicity in the Hereafter.

Question 14

Sir, please also tell us something about the status of art from the viewpoint of religion, i.e. Islam, especially about the criterion for the religious or Islamic nature of an art.

Answer: First of all, we must give a description of art. A complete definition of art, like the definition of other things especially the mysterious within a person—such as the mind and soul—is either impossible or at least very difficult to formulate. Hence, we shall content ourselves here with a description of art.

We must regard art as having three phases:

First phase: It is a special feeling caused by a specific genius or ardent

p: 196

desire. Art is one of the inner realities within a person and it does not pertain to imagination, illusions and nominal things. It is like genius, discovering and craving for them. Apart from the essential value of this reality it has the potential to possess actual value.

Second phase: It is the mental framework, the identity of a person. When an artistic feeling is under way like a limpid fountain, it accommodates special features of the mental framework, and is ready to appear in society. In terms of special features, quality and values, the fate of art in this phase is determined. Like a limpid fountain, which flows from a pure source, it follows its course before reaching the bases of trees, flowers and plants or being mixed with other things, detrimental or beneficial to the roots of plants. As such, one must scrutinize the main root of decency or indecency of the various arts. It must be seen which mind provides the life-giving water of artistic feelings and which human identity justifies it. The common arts, which unfortunately go against and undermine the pristine values of man’s “rational life” in the name of arts and culture, belong to the first category. The expressed sense of genius in the second phase can either be contaminated by harmful substances, or presented as excellent elements of man’s “rational life” in this phase.

Third phase: It is the actual piece of art in the outside world. It is in this phase that art is connected with the members of society. If the purpose behind making an artistic work is to relieve the pain and suffering of people, and to rectify, organize and improve their lives in the context of “rational life”. (“My life and my death are all for the sake of Allah, the Lord of all the worlds”(1)), then this art is not only religious or Islamic but it is also highly desirable, and regarded as obligatory (wajibat). This is the general law governing art from the viewpoint of religion. Of course, there are ample discussions on how to identify the actual manifestations of decent and indecent arts contained in pertinent treatises and books.

If the goal of art is solely to present artistic talent and show sublime feeling which the artistic talent generates—provided that it does not bring about any arbitrary effect on the people’s morality and does not deprive them of religion—there is no problem at all, except when the artist does it out of selfishness. Like an oil lamp, he sets himself on fire and temporarily gives light so that his work draws interest. Like law (‘advanced’ law and

p: 197

‘adherent’ law) there is, ‘advanced’ art and ‘adherent’ art. The value of ‘advanced’ art lies in the fact that with pure mind and soul, the artists activate their artistic talent by benefiting from lofty human principles, justifying them by the discovery of a wholesome life toward the Sublime Threshold of Perfection and benefiting from it.

Question 15

What is your concept of “religious technology”?

Answer: No technogical instrument, device or stuff is ‘religious’ or ‘nonreligious’. In fact, when the basic needs of a person prompt him to pursue a technological innovation or invention so as to meet those needs, this is something indicated in the Qur’an:

﴿وَأَعِدُّواْ لَهُم مَّا اسْتَطَعْتُم مِّن قُوَّةٍ﴾

“Prepare against them whatever you can of [military] power.”(1)

That is, “You amass and prepare whatever you can of power for the sake of defending your life, prestige and honor against the enemy. Such a device is motivated by religion. In the past, some simpletons tried to extract the principles of all the technological inventions and advancements ever achieved by mankind, from the Qur’an and traditions (ahadīth). This was an exercise in futility, because the main function of heavenly books and religious sources is not to teach mankind the necessity of mathematics, physics, chemistry, botany, and geology. The main function of the prophets and the heavenly books is to teach mankind the basic needs in the realm of “rational life” and to campaign for meeting those needs. But the quantity, quality and nature of the devise or instrument supposed to perform the said function depends on the dictates of reason, types of understanding, acumen for discovery and invention, and kinds of skills God has given to His servants.

Obviously, just as the reason behind the necessity for and the manner of preparing the shovel for farming, a specific equipment for constructing a building, and formulating different types of medicines for curing diseases is not a function of the prophets and heavenly books. Similarly, it is not the function of the prophets and the heavenly books to state the ways of producing technological devices, manufacturing computers, analyzing

p: 198

atomic particles, and the like. Sometimes, there are general indications about basic principles governing the universe so that supernatural leaders (the prophets, Imams and awliya’), the heedful, the wise and the authorities (ūlū ’l-albab) know and prove to other people that the knowledge contained in the heavenly books are based upon knowledge of the general principles and fundamentals.

Question 16

Sir, in view of the fact that economics has two facets, i.e. value and knowledge, can it be said that since economics is a science and deals with the external world, it is not specified if it is Islamic or not, and since it is value-laden and is of nominal (i‘tibarī) things, it can be Islamic or non-Islamic?

Answer: At the outset, it must be pointed out that the term i‘tibarī is not accurate in value-laden cases of dos and don’ts because i‘tibar (validity) does not only signify ja‘l (forge), waz‘ (standing), or insha’ (composition) which is i‘tibar in a sense. In fact, when an i‘tibar or an insha’ appears, there are realities such as self-preservation, instinct, primary or secondary needs in prior phases, and there are also realities that will appear after appearance of i‘tibar (composition, standing, or convention) and all of them have actual reality. Let us return to the main answer to the question. We must first take into account the [main] principles and then deal with the secondary principles and rules. Islamic economics is based upon a number of general principles and fundamentals some of which we shall mention below:

1. In Islam, ownership is not a goal but rather a means. It is the response of man’s specific instinct in matters of specific laws pertaining to him, the organizer of the relationship among people, and their relationship with economic matters.

2. Economics in Islam has both individual and social dimensions.

3. Based on the above principle, ownership in Islam is not limited, and as long as it does not obstruct the livelihood and rights of other people in society, it is free.

4. The general rule is to have ownership, unless it harms the people in society. For this reason, some utilizations of what one owns is prohibited. For example:

Hoarding of essential items for society

p: 199

- Hoarding that leads to inflation and disruption of economic activities

- Production and distribution of harmful products

- Production and distribution of means of debauchery

- Usury (riba)

- Production and distribution of narcotic drugs

- Selling of weapons to hostile states and nations at the time of war, except defensive devices

- Production and distribution of the articles of excessive luxury

- Extravagance in whatever form

- The necessity for preparing the means of livelihood from the most basic animals’ fodder to the highest means of livelihood, whether they are basic agricultural products or produced by the most advanced technology ever available

- In the production and distribution of economic commodities, priority is given to those which are more essential for human life

5. The value of work, both mental and physical, in accordance with the Qur’anic verse, “And do not cheat the people of their goods,”(1) must be real and not artificial. The outcome of this vital economic principle is that if a worker is not aware of the real value (amount of wage) of his work, or due to an emergency situation, he is satisfied with a wage lesser than the real value of his work, he does not get the real value of, or wage for, his work and the ruler is supposed to prepare the grounds for the worker to get the real value of his work.

In case of free competition, the supervision and guidance of the state is indispensable as this prevents people motivated by self-interest to violate the rights of others

6. Economic relations with other people and nations are free, provided that they do not go against the Islamic laws.

It is clear that the execution of these general principles requires specific cases, means and tools, as well as establishing relations with nature and

p: 200

people, and acquiring sciences and crafts which are needed to provide for and organize those affairs. As such, they pertain to the channel of religious obligations, whether these sciences and crafts can be learned within Muslim societies or in foreign communities provided that, this does not lead to foreign domination and spread of corruption in Muslim societies.

Given this reply, it becomes clear that any reality that has something to do with the concerns of Islam such as the relationship between subject and decree, premise and conclusion, means and end, and the like, ceases to be neutral and acquires a religious color. If. providing the means of livelihood for people requires the learning of related sciences and acquiring a specific technology, anyone (state, society, or individual) who does not take the necessary steps shall be regarded as accountable and offender.

Question 17

[Comment: In continuation of the professor’s talk, what is worth-mentioning is that since man is a free being and his freedom also interferes in the diversity of his economic life, a stable economic condition in all periods cannot be considered for man. It is also for this reason that Islam has not introduced a rigid science of economics for all stages of human life, although fixed morality and legal decrees in the form of real cases are taken into account for all periods, and whose difference with economics shall be scrutinized elsewhere. This point is not a defect in the religion of Islam but one of its merits. Moreover, no school of thought or science can offer a fixed science of economics. The essence of science, including economics, changes or evolves according to the conditions and exigency of time, and a fixed science of economics is something impossible. Nonetheless, Islam supervises and guides economics in two aspects, i.e. in terms of jurisprudence (legality) and morality. Economic moral orders, and economic decrees, and jurisprudential rules of Islam, do not establish a distinct science of economics but, at the same time, they cannot allow just any science of economics to emerge and operate. Thus, the science of economics allowed to emerge and flourish in Islamic society is that which harmonizes itself with the moral and jurisprudential rules as well as the moral and legal decrees of Islamic economics. Similar is the relationship of Islam with other new branches of social sciences such as sociology, psychology and political science. In other words, Islam does not offer a distinct sociology, psychology, political science, and economics. Yet, it has stated certain principles in those fields and by relying on them, any field is allowed to

p: 201

emerge and flourish. Therefore, if we ever talk about “Islamic sociology,” “Islamic psychology,” “Islamic political science,” or “Islamic economics,” this means that they are organized in corcordance and harmony with the Islamic views and fundamentals in those fields. This does not imply that Islam has brought down a complete and comprehensive “science” in economics, political science, psychology, sociology, and the like, thus making us needless of human research in those fields. Keeping this in view, in economics, too, any economic system that succeeds in harmonizing itself with the legal foundations, requirements and rules as well as economic values of Islam is religious and Islamic. And any economic system that fails to conform and reconcile with them is neither religious nor Islamic, and Islam and Islamic society must not allow it to emerge and operate.]

Question 18

“Religious art” and “religious technology” are specific. I want to raise a more general question: Does labeling these things as “religious” suggest that every thing can be a means or instrument for understanding and realizing religious thought? Can all things have such a function?

Answer: Some thinkers do not have a correct notion of religion. Many Western thinkers, in particular, belong to this group. They have accepted the notion that religion is a personal matter between man and God and, severed religion from all matters and aspects of material and spiritual life. By making this heroic step, they have actually separated the essence of religion from human existence, practically reducing man—in the words of the conscious and wise men of the West—to the level of unconscious car dents, and talking about Epicurus and Epicureanism(1) in order to amuse him. They have entertained him with debauchery, a drinking spree and addiction, so much so, that in the words of Mawlana (Rūmī), they have undermined his thinking and mental power.

جز ذکر نه دین او و ذکر او سوی اسفل برد او را فکر او

p: 202

Nihil est religio et precatio ejus nisi penis:(1)

His thought has borne him down to the lowest depth.(2)

This intellectual degradation in the past centuries, as in the time of Mawlana (Rūmī), was upheld by a minority and advocated behind closed doors, but, in contemporary time, thanks to the likes of Freud—the Genghis Khans with a dim light labeled “science” in their hands and with “scientific masks” on their faces—have drawn the people to futility. During this period, by taking pleasure in the way of life of bees and “beast in every aspect,” they have ceased to think and talk about the essence of life, and some have even gone to the extent of impudently saying, “To think is a kind of illness.”

This destructive weapon against the essence of man can also be detected in the minds of the likes of Sartre who said, “Man has history but has no essence”; that is, [only] man and his behavior exists!

In the course of explaining the current answer by inference, it is suggested to refer first to the general definition of religion we have presented earlier. If the first level of consciousness, which is vigilance (yaqzah), is given to a person, and remains in him, all moments of his life shall be directed according to the Qur’anic verse, “My life and my death are all for the sake of Allah, the Lord of all the worlds’.”(3) After that—from his most trivial action to his greatest exploits and thoughts; from a simple notion to the most elaborate and intricate scientific-technological ideas; also, from the initial chant of Allahu akbar (Allah is the greatest) to the acts of worship performed at all times —all moments of his life shall be irrigated by the water of religion.(4) Now, this question arises: What is this vigilance, which if possessed by a person, his entire life acquires religious color?

Vigilance refers to that consciousness which makes a person consider himself a purposefulness part of a grand totality that operates according to the direction and command of God’s law, and moves towards eternity moment by moment. This vigilance breeds another vigilance, which a person

p: 203

will experience with utmost clarity:

تا مایة طبعها سرشتند ما را ورقی دگر نوشتند

تا در نگریم و راز جوئیم سررشته کار باز جوئیم

It is with this realization that a person understands that if all knowledge and learning in the world are inculcated in the mind, yet they do not contribute at all in the process of his perfection, he will acquire no benefit from them except their natural existence.

The fact is that all moments and minutest details of man’s life are under the supervision and dominance of God. By realizing that life is a very important part of a purposeful totality which is moving toward the Presence of the Lord, man’s ardent desire to reach the Lordly Presence flows from his inner nature, and thereafter, even the drawing he makes is in a state of searching, and this as a whole is an act of worship.

هر کس کاو دور ماند از اصل خیش باز جوید روزگار وصل خویش

Every one who is left far from his source

Looks back for the time when he was united with it.(1)

In conclusion, you can ask, which action, saying, thinking, moments, and even breathing of such a person is not religious?

In the words of Mawlana (Rūmī),

وین نفس جانهای ما را همچنان اندک اندک دزدد از حبس جهان

تا الیه یصعد اطیاب الکلم صاعدا منا الی حیث علم

ترتقی انفاسنا بالمنتقی متحفا منا الی دار البقا

ثم تاتینا مکافات المقال ضعف ذاک رحمة من ذی الجلال

ثم یلجینا الی امثالها کی ینال العبد مما نالها

And our souls, like this breath (of ours) steals away,

Little by little, from the prisons of the world

The perfumes of our (good) words ascend even unto Him,

Ascending from us whither God knoweth.

Our breaths soar up with the choice (words),

p: 204

As a gift from us, to the abode of everlastingness;

Then comes to us the recompense of our speech,

A double (recompense) thereof, as a mercy from (God) the Glorious;

Then He causes us to utter good words like those (already uttered),

That His servant may obtain (something more) of what he has obtained(1)

Question 19

Can it be said that in the call of the prophets and religions with divine origin, in general, and the religion of Islam, in particular, although benefiting from the world and nature is not prohibited, no emphasis can be seen on stimulating and encouraging the people to maximize benefiting from the world and the bounties of nature?

Answer: The overall context of the divine religion conveyed by Prophet Ibrahīm (Abraham) (‘a) and perfected in the mission of the Prophet of Islam s has given so much importance to the lives of people in the world that blindness in this world is deemed tantamount to blindness in the Hereafter. In this regard, the Holy Qur’an states, thus:

﴿وَمَنْ کَانَ فِی هَذِهِ أَعْمَی فَهُوَ فِی الآخِرَةِ أَعْمَی﴾

“But whoever has been blind in this [world] will be blind in the Hereafter.”(2)

The Qur’anic verses that command research and study of the universe as divine signs, do not mean that we have to obtain some academic degrees and be delighted with having them. Instead, in this world the personality of a person must come to fruition, and this coming to fruition is the synthesis or product of science, knowledge and deployment of the “human I” in the objective world, without which it is impossible to benefit from the world for

the rational life. In reply to the current question, we shall point to some Qur’anic verses and traditions pertaining to exertion of efforts for life in this world. In another verse of the Holy Qur’an, it is thus stated:

﴿وَابْتَغِ فِیمَا آتَاکَ اللَّهُ الدَّارَ الآخِرَةَ وَلا تَنْسَ نَصِیبَکَ مِنَ الدُّنْیَا﴾

“By the means of what Allah has given you, seek the abode of the

p: 205

Hereafter, while not forgetting your share of this world.”(1)

In this noble verse, organizing life in this world is not considered unlawful. In fact, it has an extremely subtle point on the merit of life in this world and the means of livelihood as a launch pad for the eternal life. Keeping this in view, the reproached and blameworthy kind of life in this world is that which plunges man into materialism, thus depriving him of the life worthy of the connection with God—“My life and my death are all for the sake of Allah, the Lord of all the worlds’.”(2) Another point regarding this verse is that even this worldly life does not bar one from enjoying its pleasures and benefits as long as they do not turn his “rational life” into an animalistic one.

﴿قُلْ مَنْ حَرَّمَ زِینَةَ اللّهِ الَّتِیَ أَخْرَجَ لِعِبَادِهِ وَالْطَّیِّبَاتِ مِنَ الرِّزْقِ﴾

“Say, ‘Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants, and the good things of [His] provision?’”(3)

One of the reasons behind the mission of the prophets (‘a) is the regulation of the people’s material aspects of life.(4)

Abū’l-Bakhtarī narrated that the Holy Prophet s thus said while supplicating:

اللّهمّ بارک لنا فی الخبز. فإنّه لولا الخبز ما صلینا ولا صمنا ولا أدنیا فرائض ربّنا.

“O Allah! Bless our bread. (That is to say, economically organize our life in this world.) For without bread, neither can we say our prayers, observe fasting nor act upon the commands of our Lord.”(5)

Imam al-Sadiq (‘a) is reported to have said:

لیس منّا من ترک دنیاه لآخرته ولا آخرته لدنیاه.

“He is not from among us, whoever abandons his world for the Hereafter and his Hereafter for this world.”(6)

It is narrated that Imam al-Baqir (‘a) said:

p: 206

إنّی اجدنی امقت الرجل یتعذر علیه المکاسب فیتلقی علی قفاه ویقول أللّهمّ ارزقنی ویدع أن ینتشر فی الارض ویلتمس من فضل الله والذرة تخرج من حجرها تلتمس رزقها.

“I see myself an enemy of the person for whom it is difficult to strive in life, and he lies on his back and says, ‘O Allah! Give me provision and let it be spread on the ground to seek the grace of Allah,’ while the ant comes out of its hole to look for provision.”(1)

Imam al-Baqir (‘a) has also said:

إنّی لأبغض الرجل أن یکون کسلانا عن أمر دنیاه ومن کسل عن أمر دنیاه فهو عن أمر آخرته لأکسل.

“Indeed I hate the person who is indisposed in his worldly affairs, and whoever is indisposed in the worldly affairs is [more] indisposed in the otherworldly affairs.”(2)

[The following traditions are also recorded in the corpus of hadīth:]

قال رسول الله صلی الله علیه وآله وسلم: إنّ الله لا یحب الفارغ الصحیح لا فی عمل الدنیا ولا فی عمل الآخرة.

“The Apostle of Allah s said: ‘Indeed Allah does not like the one who is idle both in the worldly and otherworldly matters.’”(3)

روی عن رسول الله صلی الله علیه وآله وسلم: لو قامت القیامة وفی ید أحدکم فیلة (صغار النخل) فإنّ استطاع أن لا یقوم حتی یغرسها فلیفعل.

“The Apostle of Allah is reported to have said: ‘If the Day of Judgment is to come and there is a date-palm sapling in the hand of one of you, if he could be able not to rise up unless he plants it, he must do so.’”(4)

In conclusion, the definite requisite of the Qur’anic verses and traditions that show the need to preserve the dignity and honor of the Muslims is to strive hard for the mundane affairs. This is because with the startling utilization of the tools for domination, exploitation and slavery, the abjectness and humiliation of the societies that neglect organizing their worldly affairs are certain. The same God who defends such life in this world says:

p: 207

﴿وَأَعِدُّواْ لَهُم مَّا اسْتَطَعْتُم مِّن قُوَّةٍ﴾

“Prepare against them whatever you can of [military] power.”(1)

The same criterion for the defense of dignity and honor has given the order for the strongest physical defense.

What is more explicit than the said criterion is the following verse:

﴿إِنَّ الَّذِینَ تَوَفَّاهُمُ الْمَلائِکَةُ ظَالِمِی أَنْفُسِهِمْ قَالُوا فِیمَ کُنْتُمْ قَالُوا کُنَّا مُسْتَضْعَفِینَ فِی الأرْضِ قَالُوا أَلَمْ تَکُنْ أَرْضُ اللَّهِ وَاسِعَةً فَتُهَاجِرُوا فِیهَا فَأُولَئِکَ مَأْوَاهُمْ جَهَنَّمُ وَسَاءَتْ مَصِیرًا﴾

“Indeed those whom the angels take away while they are wronging themselves, they ask, ‘What state were you in?’ They reply, ‘We were abased in the land.’ They say, ‘Was not Allah’s earth vast enough so that you might migrate in it?’ The refuge of such shall be hell, and it is an evil destination.”(2)

If you scrutinize the contents of the blessed order of the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) to Malik al-Ashtar(3) and his instructions to other government officials, we will definitely see that there has been no exact, necessary and sufficient program for accurately organizing the “rational life” of human societies, similar to those orders and instructions.

What is to be borne in mind is that the life in this world is a very meaningful passageway for the eternal life in the presence of the Absolute Perfection, Almighty Allah. For this reason, all positive human potential through sincere efforts and struggle in man’s relationship with himself are ordered in what is called ‘utmost efforts’ (described as sa‘ī, kabad, kadah, and competition to do good deeds):

این تقاضاهای کار از بهر آن شد موکّل تا شود سرّت عیان

These demands (cravings) for action were appointed in order that

Your inward consciousness should come clearly into (outward) view.(4)

All the emphasis and orders to know the universe, and to know one’s self, are generally not meant to make the human mind a mirror reflecting all the

p: 208

components of the universe and man, or to perceive the Divine Attributes of Beauty and Glory. Instead, they mean benefiting from the universe and knowing man in general as well as in relation with God, which will definitely be impossible without self-edification, honoring of man and humanity, acquisition of skills and knowledge of the world of nature. In general, we must accept that the perfection of man can only be attained by means of knowing and purifying the self through sublime human values, knowing the universe and benefiting from its various dimensions, levels and realities, to harmonize the inner world with the outer world along the path of stimulating one’s total existence and potential asset.

Question 20

Kindly state briefly the general and common viewpoints and concepts of Islam and other religions, along with the exclusive viewspoints of Islam.

Answer: In order to identify the general and common concepts of Islam and other religions, we must first consider the types of religion:

1. The religions prior to the Abrahamic Faith;

2. The religions with unclear beliefs on the Origin (mabda’) and Resurrection (ma‘ad), such as Buddhism;

3. The Abrahamic religions presently constituted by Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Of course, it is possible that the Sabians and Zoroastrians are also among the followers of Prophet Ibrahīm (‘a);

4. Sects and denominations such as Protestantism (from Catholic Christianity) and similar groups;

5. Regional religions such as Shintoism in Japan and Confucianism in China);

6. Deviant schools, which do not have real religious roots but have been given religious color from the beginning or later on.

7. Nonreligious schools with various labels, one of which claims to be championing humanity, called “humanism”, asserting that given the human principles it upholds, it can respond to all the needs and concerns of humankind. Other forms also exist and focus more on the political, legal and economic dimension of people.

p: 209

Alongside these schools of thought, there are diverse views on the different elements of human life and to distinguish them from one another is worthwhile. Some of these views and perspectives are as follows:

1. The school of “adherent” (customary, conventional) law and “advanced” law

2. The economic schools of individualism and collectivism

3. Political systems such as democracy and republicanism in various shades, oligarchy, constitutional monarchy, totalitarianism, and the like

Now, we shall embark on stating the general and common viewpoints and concepts of Islam and other religions and schools of thought. As the Islamic school of thought is a religious school, naturally its belief in the Origin (mabda’) and the Resurrection (ma‘ad), i.e. God and eternity, and management of the “rational life” of people through the guidance revealed by God, the Glorious, which has been conveyed by the prophets to His servants, is common to every religious school. From the historical perspective, we only come to know of the beliefs of the religions prior to the Abrahamic Faith through the Islamic sacred scripture (the Qur’an) because apart from the Qur’an, there is no access to a reliable source about the basic tenets and beliefs of religions. The Noble Qur’an states:

﴿شَرَعَ لَکُم مِّنَ ٱلدِّینِ مَا وَصَّی بِهِۦ نُوحًا وَٱلَّذِیٓ أَوْحَیْنَآ إِلَیْکَ وَمَا وَصَّیْنَا بِهِۦٓ إِبْرَهِیمَ وَمُوسَی وَعِیسَیٓ ۖ أَنْ أَقِیمُوا۟ ٱلدِّینَ وَلَا تَتَفَرَّقُوا۟ فِیهِ ۚ کَبُرَ عَلَی ٱلْمُشْرِکِینَ مَا تَدْعُوهُمْ إِلَیْهِ﴾

“He has prescribed for you the religion which He had enjoined upon Noah and which We have [also] revealed to you, and which We had enjoined upon Abraham, Moses and Jesus, declaring, ‘Maintain the religion, and do not be divided in it.’ Hard on the polytheists is that to which you summon them.”(1)

From this and similar Qur’anic verses, it is clear that there have been general and common beliefs and concepts in the divine religion in all periods and places although there might have been differences in details and secondary issues according to temporal and spatial factors:

﴿وَلِکُلِّ أُمَّةٍ جَعَلْنَا مَنسَکًا﴾

“For every nation We have appointed a rite.”(2)

p: 210

The Abrahamic Faith which is the origin of all subsequent religions is the same natural religion (religio naturalis). In some verses of the Qur’an, God, the Glorious, has referred to the same faith or way of Abraham (‘a). In one Qur’anic verse, God, the Exalted, says:

﴿مَا کَانَ إِبْرَهِیمُ یَهُودِیًّا وَلَا نَصْرَانِیّاً وَلَکِن کَانَ حَنِیفاً مُّسْلِماً وَمَا کَانَ مِنَ ٱلْمُشْرِکِینَ﴾

“Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian. Rather he was a hanīf (monotheist), a muslim.”(1)

That is, Prophet Ibrahīm (‘a) was the conveyor of the universal message of the divine religion, which is the same Islam. We brought the different sects into being later. All the prophets that came afterward, such as Prophet Mūsa (Moses), Prophet ‘Īsa (Jesus) and the Seal of the Prophets (‘a) propagated the same Abrahamic Faith with slight temporal variations. It is stated in another verse, thus:

﴿إِنَّ الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا وَالَّذِینَ هَادُوا وَالصَّابِئُونَ وَالنَّصَارَی مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْیَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَعَمِلَ صَالِحًا فَلا خَوْفٌ عَلَیْهِمْ وَلا هُمْ یَحْزَنُونَ﴾

“Indeed the faithful, the Jews, the Sabaeans, and the Christians—those who have faith in Allah and the Last Day and act righteously—they will have no fear, nor will they grieve.”(2)

From this and similar verses, it becomes very clear that the original substance of the religion of Prophet Abraham (‘a) has universal views and concepts which are common to all religions with divine origin, both prior and after him.

The reliable source that can prove and explain those universal views and common concepts in the Abrahamic Faith—as we have mentioned above—is the Noble Qur’an. There are many Qur’anic verses about the Great Prophet’s s possession of traits, which show his possession of those universal views and common concepts.

The traits possessed by Prophet Abraham (‘a) of having faith and belief in the eternal principles of the universal religion and acting upon the rights and duties promulgated by the said religion can be indicative of the principles and secondary tenets of this eternal school of thought. In our view, most of these traits are as follows:

p: 211

1. Truthful and doer of good (Sūrat Maryam 19:41);

2. The Imam [of mankind] (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:124);

3. Successful in passing a difficult trial (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:124);

4. Purifier of the House of God (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:125);

5. Faithful to Islam (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:131);

6. One who returns to God (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:128);

7. Teaches the Book and Wisdom (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:129);

8. Undergoes refinement and purification of the soul (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:129);

9. Chosen one and one of the righteous (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:130);

10. Endowed with rectitude (rushd) (Sūrat al-Anbiya’ 21:51) and upholder of the creed of rectitude and perfection (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:130). This quality can be inferred from this line: “And who will [ever] renounce Abraham’s creed except one who fools himself?”;

11. Real monotheist;

12. A hanīf, i.e. someone who possesses a moderate and natural religion free from any exaggeration or deficiency (Sūrat al-Baqarah 2:135);

13. Friend of Allah (khalīl Allah) (Sūrat al-Nisa’ 4:125);

14. Struggler in the way of tawhīd even against his nearest of kin (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:74);

15. Possessor of insight into the dominions of the heavens and the earth (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:75);

16. Attained a high level of certitude (yaqīn) (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:75);

17. Upholder of sound rational argument (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:76-79);

18. Seeker of his own basis for [the existence of] God, the Creator of the heavens and the earth (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:76-79);

19. Monotheist and shunned polytheism (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:76-79);

20. Guided by Allah Sūrat al-An‘am 6:8-83);

21. Wayfarer and presenter of the path of safety (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:8-83);

p: 212

22. Attained the highest level of rectitude in God and along the path of His Axis (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:162);

23. Guided to the Straight Path (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:161);

24. Possessor and propagator of the same religion conveyed to other prophets such as Nūh (Noah), Mūsa (Moses), ‘Īsa (Jesus) and Muhammad (‘a) (Sūrat al-Shūra 42:13; Sūrat al-Saffat 37:83);

25. Patient;

26. Supplicant;

27. Penitent before Allah (Sūrat Hūd 11:75);

28. Affectionate, sympathetic and concerned with the servants of God (Sūrat Ibrahīm 14:36);

29. Worshipper;

30. Thankful to Allah (Sūrat al-Nahl 16:120-121);

31. Professed an easy and moderate religion (Sūrat al-Hajj 22:78);

32. Leader;

33. Exponent of the Truth;

34. One of the inheritors of the Heaven (Sūrat al-Shu‘ara’ 26:78-89);

35. Reliant on God; and

36. Shunned and disavowed the corrupt people (Sūrat al-Mumtahanah 60:4);

Taking into account the realities and requisites of the abovementioned qualities, we arrive at this very important conclusion that the framework of the divine religion that made Prophet Abraham (‘a) attain those qualities is perfectly rational and natural, consistent with and stimulant of positive human potential.

Nowadays, an essential and sufficient study or research on the universal views and concepts common to all Abrahamic religions can lead us, all followers of Patriarch Abraham, to a very essential and completely beneficial sense of harmony, although, unfortunately, some existing factors stand in the way of this harmony and coexistence. The first mouthpiece of this unity and harmony in universal views and common concepts is Islam as expressed in this Qur’anic verse:

p: 213

﴿قُلْ یَا أَهْلَ ٱلْکِتَبِ تَعَالَوْا۟ إِلَی کَلِمَةٍۢ سَوَآءٍ بَیْنَنَا وَبَیْنَکُمْ أَلَّا نَعْبُدَ إِلَّا ٱللَّهَ وَلَا نُشْرِکَ بِهِۦ شَیْئاً وَلَا یَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُنَا بَعْضًا أَرْبَاباً مِّن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا۟ فَقُولُوا۟ ٱشْهَدُوا بِأَنَّا مُسْلِمُونَ﴾

“Say, ‘O People of the Book! Come to a word common between us and you: that we will worship no one but Allah, and that we will not ascribe any partner to Him, and that we will not take each other as lords besides Allah.’ But if they turn away, say, ‘Be witnesses that we are muslims.’”(1)

This word sawa’ (common) which is the greatest factor for unity of the fundamental principles is the best proof that the religion of Islam does not stand in the way of the unity and harmony among the Abrahamic religions; in fact, it is its mouthpiece and standardbearer. Indeed, this noble verse clearly proves that the Abrahamic Faith can justify or eliminate the differences resulting from peculiarities of each of the Abrahamic religions believed in and practiced by their followers.

Question 21

How can Islam be interpreted considering the differences in the finality (khatamiyyah) of Islam? Sir, kindly share your views on this.

Answer: The teachings of Islam are based upon man’s infinite potential for perfection. Islam has set forth the factors of man’s prosperity in this world and felicity in the Hereafter. The clearest proof of this claim is that the ideological principles, laws, and jurisprudential, legal, moral, political, economic, and cultural duties of this religion have been laid down in such a way that up to now, thousands of people have reached the height of perfection. The exception will be when human nature is extinguished and all man’s mundane and spiritual principles cease to exist. Of course, in this case, Islam cannot give any answer to the problems of man, not because it is deficient, but because of the extinction of man and humanity from the page of existence.

Now, in explaining and proving this fact, we must take into account the Holy Prophet s, Imam ‘Alī ibn Abī Talib and other Imams, and thousands of personages that attained rectitude such as Salman al-Farsī, Abū Dharr al-Ghiffarī, Malik al-Ashtar, Uways al-Qarnī, ‘Ammar ibn Yasīr, Miqdad ibn Aswad al-Kindī, ‘Amr ibn Khaza’ī, Hujr ibn ‘Udayy, and the like. Would there be any chance for these men of rectitude not to have the Islamic principles and rules for knowing how to organize the four basic types of

p: 214

relationship? Islam has presented in human history the likes of Farabī, Ibn Sīna, Ibn Rushd, Abū Rayhan al-Bīrūnī, Hasan ibn Haytham, ‘Attar, Jalal al-Dīn Muhammad Mawlawī (Rūmī), Mīr Damad, Sadr al-Muta’allihīn, Kulaynī,(1) Sadūq,(2) ‘Allamah Hillī,(3) and thousands of similar personalities. Obviously, it cannot be imagined that the nature of man be totally changed individually or collectively. And such men of rectitude would be incapable of living with such conditions. Human society is formed by individuals whose potential can be activated from within themselves. Today, a sublime system of universal human rights is being presented to human society on the basis of the texts and rules taken from Divine scriptures and revelations. If man abandons his selfishness and animalistic tendencies and keeps away from hedonism and profiteering, he will advance with these universal rights competing in goodness and perfection. The advancement of humanity along the path of perfection does not hinge on the astounding technological progress, but on lofty human morality. Thus man, by acquiring the “morality of Allah” (akhlaq Allah) and the “etiquettes of Allah” (adab Allah), will acquire the quality of “advancement” and make purposeful rational life attainable.

This same divine religion, whose basic principles were conveyed by the great prophets in the past conforming with the primary levels of culture of those periods, came into being and Islam fostered the ability of preserving its ideological principles and all the individual and social laws pertaining to man. Given these conditions, God, the Glorious, has revealed in toto the scripture of the eternal religion on His chosen beloved, Muhammad al-Mustafa s.

p: 215

p: 216

p: 218

Secularism entered the arena of political thoughts in the 14th and 15th centuries as a result of the contradiction between the Church’s socio-political ways and methods in the West. Such a contradiction between religion and politics is impossible in Islam because religious beliefs, politics, science, economics, jurisprudence, law, culture, arts, morality, and the like are integral parts of the truth in Islam.

“He who proposes to make that inquiry which is necessary concerning what government is best, ought first to determine what manner of living is most eligible… What is good, relative to man, may be divided into three sorts, what is external, what appertains to the body, and what to the soul. It is evident that all these must conspire to make a man happy: for no one would say that a man was happy who had no fortitude, no temperance, no justice, no prudence; but was afraid of the flies that flew round him: nor would abstain from the meanest theft if he was either hungry or dry, or would murder his dearest friend for a farthing; and also was, in every particular, as wanting in his understanding as an infant or an idiot. These truths are so evident that all must agree to them; though some may dispute about the quantity and the degree: for they may think, that a very little virtue is sufficient for happiness. (Not only he thinks that the least virtue is sufficient for him but he also sometimes believes that his virtue is more than those of others.)”(1)

After proving that happiness encompasses the three types of goodness Aristotle embarked on proving that the good pertaining to the human soul is superior and more important than the other two, and it is this good that can materialize human happiness. Aristotle thus said:

“If the soul is more noble than any outward possession, as the body, both in itself and with respect to us, it must be admitted of course that the best accidents of each must follow the same analogy. Besides, it is for the sake of the soul that these things are desirable; and it is on this account that wise men should desire them, not the soul for them. Let us therefore be well assured, that every one enjoys as much happiness as he possesses virtue and wisdom, and acts according to their dictates; since for this we have the example of God Himself, who is completely happy,(2) not from any external good; but in Himself, and because such is His nature… every good which depends not on the mind is owing to chance or fortune; but it is not from fortune that any one is wise and just: hence it follows, that that city is happiest which

p: 221

is the best and acts best: for no one can do well who acts not well; nor can the deeds either of man or city be praiseworthy without virtue and wisdom; for whatsoever is just, or wise, or prudent in a man, the same things are just, wise, and prudent in a city.”(1)

Obviously, virtue, wisdom and justice—especially in view of Aristotle’s referral to God (as these attributes are in the Essence of God)—cannot be of natural earthly matters which exist based upon instincts and nature. As such, the state, government or political system cannot eliminate religion from the mundane life. Aristotle continued, thus:

“It is possible that this noble life with virtue and wisdom (i.e. happy) is beyond what can man endure, or at least the human being that leads such a life is not due to his common nature but because he exists in a sacred truth and this sacred principle is so great that the activity of this principle of happiness increases. Now, if perception is something sacred, it follows that the happiest life is the life of perception.”(2)

Definitely, what Aristotle meant, keeping in view of his other points, is not mere perception (understanding) but wisdom as well, whose salient feature, among others, is the possession of virtue. Particularly, by considering this explicit line, “Sacred happiness is not possible except through perpetual perception,”(3) it is clear that mere conception of eternity in its abstract form is not real happiness. Instead, real happiness is the perception and realization of eternity by being in the Threshold of Absolute Eternal Perfection beyond eternity. Aristotle said, thus:

“Happiness is not a product of accident; rather, happiness is something given by God and the fruit of sweat and toil. This point is also a subject of discussion: is happiness real, or is it materialized through learning and training? Is it attained through certain habits? Or, is it possible to achieve through other similar ways? Is it true that happiness is something given by God, or something accidental? In

p: 222

reality, if there is something given by God(1) to the human beings in this world, we may dogmatically believe that happiness is a divine blessing. And man would easily accept this belief because for him there is nothing greater than happiness.”(2)

In view of this passage, ascribing secularism to Aristotle has no factual basis at all. What he stated in Politics, “Nature draws man toward the sociopolitical life through his instincts”, (Book 1, chap. 1, para. 13) does not contradict man’s necessity to acquire happiness and excellence individually and collectively through the instrumentality of the state and politics. The above expression attributes man’s political tendency to his nature, while identity, management and political goal, which he considers pertaining to the subsequent expression “happiness”, are not mentioned in the above expression.

Meanwhile, man’s necessity to acquire happiness and excellence has been pointed out by Aristotle in his Politics as well as Nicomachean Ethics. In the political history of human society, instead of taking out religion from governance, theocratic rule has been discussed. In dictionaries and encyclopedia, theocracy means “divine rule; God-centeredness; religious state-government in which God is the Sovereign; belief in the necessity of divine rule; administration of a country according to religious laws, etc.”(3)

In order to understand the narrative and conflict between the Church and the State as well as political phenomena such as theocracy (divine rule) and secularism (removal of religion from the temporal and political life), we need to make a brief survey of this conflict.

Church and the State) commanded loyalty and obedience of the people in the same society among the same individuals. Theoretically, the precept of “Give unto Ceasar what is Ceasar’s and unto God what is God’s” (Matthew 21:22) was supposed to have been followed, but in practice, the respective scopes of sovereignty of the temporal and ecclesiastical powers clashed.

“In primitive societies, this distinction between the religious and temporal aspects of social life, as is prevalent nowadays, had been practically impossible. In early civilizations everywhere, the king or the ruler had been regarded as the representative of the divine (divine-heavenly powers). Until the time of the acceptance of Christianity by the Roman Emperor, the person of the emperor had also the highest religious authority, controlling religion and the state. In fact, the emperor also used to be the object of worship as “the god on the surface of the earth”.

“At any rate, the concepts of “the State” and “the Church” as two separate entities can be discussed when the line of distinction between the secular society and the religious society or societies within the same political sphere can be drawn. It is not correct for us to say that the distinction between the government and religion was brought into being by Christianity, although the main responsibility is shouldered by the said religion. It started with Judaism, for with the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 CE, the Jews no longer possessed an independent political society. From then on, they lived as a Jewish religious minority in the heart of a non-Jewish state. As such, they were forced to think about their membership in religious community and their secular citizenship as two separate matters. When Christianity was founded, for sometime the early Christians were under such conditions and circumstances that they had to live under non-Christian rulers.

“Thus, since the end of Christian persecution, maltreatment and discrimination and the beginning of the period of tolerance initiated by Emperor Constantine the Great in the fourth century, the Christians were confronted with this fundamental question: What must be the nature of relationship (between the Church and the political rule of the emperor whose subjects were the Christians themselves)? There is no doubt that the Christian emperors considered themselves holders of the same station; that is, the station held by the emperor in the ancient

p: 224

polytheistic Roman thinking, and they were not only protectors of the Church but also its sovereigns…

“From the time of Theodosius I the Great, at the end of the fourth century, Christianity was transformed into the religion of the Roman Empire and polytheism or innovations within Christianity were rejected. Also, the period of fusion of the Church and the State as two faces of a single Christian society ushered in. During this time, the Church enjoyed a sort of religious supervision and political power on all citizens including the political leaders and rulers of society.” (1)

It is also written in the same reference, thus:

“The Eastern Christian Orthodox Church refers to the Byzantium or Eastern System which can be defined as ‘Caesaropapism’ (absolute rule of religious scholars or ‘caesar-papists’). The Byzantium emperors regarded themselves as protectors and vanguards of the Church on the authority of God, being authorized to enact laws on ecclesiastical affairs and rules, which would be declared by the Church as an integral part of the religious law. Of course, this does not suggest that the Church would always submit. In reality, this running fight would change according to the extent of power of the religious and political leaders in different periods. However, in view of the fact that some of the emperors would not observe the moral bounds and limits of the Church, gradually the Church kept them aside.

“One of the famous Byzantium experts, Louis Brehier, does not define the Byzantium political system (Eastern Roman Empire, Constantinople) as Caesaropapism but as theocracy in which the emperor enjoys a higher or highest position (though not an exclusive or exceptional position).”(2)

summed up as follows: “The Gospel of God must be within the jurisdiction of the Church while His Law must govern society. If we administer the Church through the law, and society through the Gospel, people will be compelled to bring the law and ordinances into the realm of divine grace and bounty, and feelings and emotions into the domain of [social] justice, thereby, letting God be deprived of His Station of Sovereignty, letting Satan rule by us abiding with the civil order. This turned into a form of official religion in places where the majority was Lutheran such as Germany and the Scandinavian states.

In many places, princes practically assumed the kind of supervision and command which the Roman Catholic Bishops assumed.

John Calvin(1) had made lesser theoretical efforts on the separation of the two realms, i.e. religious and civil. In his opinion, Geneva must turn into a theocracy in which the holy men would rule, and the divinely promised society must be founded on the divine law as revealed in the Sacred Scripture. No parts of social or city life must be so far, secular, or unimportant, to be able to escape from the supervision of the Calvinists.

In the politico-religious history of the non-Islamic East and West, we can see that the meaning of secularism, i.e., the concept of omitting religion from the mundane, political and scientific life, is much clearer than that of theocracy, i.e. the rule of God in society. Basing the management and justification of individual and collective life on man himself is an unambiguous concept not difficult to understand. The concept of divine sovereignty in society is ambiguous because of possible interpretations. We shall mention here two important possibilities on the abovementioned concept:

The first possibility is that all political, scientific, cultural, economic, and legal figures of society are directly informed of the reality by Almighty God, through divine revelation or inspiration. This possibility is incorrect because, firstly, it has not been established that the prominent figures of society (with the exception of the known prophets) have ever claimed to be recipients of revelation. Secondly, if ever they were receiving revelation pertaining to the management of society, no conflict or clash would ever arise between and among them, whereas, so many conflicts and quarrels among the prominent figures of society can be observed.

p: 227

The second possibility is that the political figures of society are so inwardly purified and polished that by the will of God, the Glorious, they can intuitively discern the reality and utilize it in the lives of people. It is clear that in addition to the conflicts, the prominent figures in society commit huge mistakes that cannot be Divine.

Therefore, secularism in a given social form gives rise to a serious conflict among ecclesiastical, political and social figures. All the conflicts and diversity of ideas in the 14th and 15th centuries became manifest and gradually evolved. This intellectual development happened in the course of three famous events, the first of which is discussed in this chapter, while the other two shall be discussed in the next chapter.

guiding all the elements opposing the Pope and Christian tradition. Secondly, Marcel Dupado (?) propounded and developed the assumption of sufficiency of civil society, turning it into a form of secularism connected to God-wariness (taqwa) and close to Erastianism, following the belief of Thomas Erastus,(1) that the state must take charge of religious affairs, and that the church must submit to the state. In the course of this quarrel, religious power was restricted, while the exclusive nature of its functions in the otherworldly affairs developed, leaving the Church as an important social institution.

The third event refers to the quarrel that took place for the first time within the Church among the clerics. This kind of quarrel was different from the disputes between the religious and temporal powers, and opposition to the absolute power of the Pope in this quarrel took a new form. It was the first time in the history of Christianity that, as reform measures, the subjects and followers of an absolute ruling power strived to impose constitutional limits and representative governance to their master. Of course, this quarrel did not end in favor of the Pope’s adversaries, and the party called Concilia or “Conciliator” whose platform is conciliation, failed to act upon their platform. It gave way to a political philosophy which led to dialogue and dispute between the temporal leaders and their followers; that is, it also awakened the subjects of political leaders to think of restricting their power through constitutionalism and representative government.(2)

This was the origin of secularism in the West that introduced religion as opposed to and repugnant to justice, freedom and science. Given these three events, the supposed pioneers of restricting [ecclesiastical authorities] gave an exaggerated account of religion and rendered a blow to humanity. Machiavelli(3) intensified this blow. If ever the current of religious life in the hearts of many people in the East and even in the West is cut, there will be no hope for the salvation of mankind from the pangs of death it was experiencing.

p: 229

O, Almighty God, the All-powerful, the All-wise! How powerful and magnificent is the design of creation You have put to work, and how powerful and magnificent is Your wisdom and will! In spite of all the fatal blows and wounds inflicted on mankind by negating religion, promoting Machiavellianism,(1) and propagating the primacy of power, natural selection and other decisive tools, the geniuses have not been able to dry up the spring of religious life within man!

Those geniuses were so ignorant that they thought of allegedly determining the functions of future mankind, saying that mankind must always move along the way we determine for it! They failed to realize that the infants of the Children of Adam (‘a) come to the world with new lives, minds and souls, without these geniuses determining the fate of these neophytes in the garden of creation. As such, if these neophytes are not indoctrinated by atheism and secularism by selfish materialists, they will benefit from all sublime human principles and values.

How we wish they would raise their heads for a few moments and hear their own voice of regret for going to extremes in negating religion.

p: 230

The Qur’an, in particular, categorically and unambiguously presents the Abrahamic Faith as opposed to oppression, aggression, despotism, ignorance, and narrow-mindedness.The Noble Qur’an declares teaching, training, wisdom, and establishment of justice and equity among the people as the goal of the prophets’ mission (bi‘thah). Such a goal can never be harmonious with the [wicked] attitude exemplified by [self-styled] Muslim and Christian leaders throughout history.

Third point: Nowadays, we must meticulously study the issue of “elimination of religion from the world,” which has been posed as a scientific and sociopolitical issue. Is the separation of religion from the sociopolitical aspects and the sheer worldliness of these aspects a natural reality explained by the authoritative thinkers? Or, by considering a number of tangible and intangible factors religion must be distinguished from politics, science, law, economics, art, ethics, and even mysticism?!

One of the strange things in this regard is that those writers who diligently write on the basis of “scientific proofs”, are those who, on the one hand, have talked about the distinction between “what is right”, and “what should be” on the basis of the Machiavellian method in science! On the other hand, they have paid no attention to all the convincing answers given to them. The same Machiavellian method obliges them to arrive at the “it must be such” (religion must be separated from politics) conclusion because “it is such” (that religion is separate from politics) which is nothing but an illusion!

Fourth point: Now, we shall set aside the past and argue that no matter what happened in the past, today we can observe that the way of thinking and method of “eliminating religion from mundane life” has become prevalent in the West and this thinking has brought about worldly results desired by the people. Can we afford to subscribe to this way of thinking?

The advancement in science and technology and the organized social life of people in the West is not caused by eliminating the pure divine religion from society but by sidelining the religion-innovators who interpret, conform and practice the divine religion according to their carnal desires in order to attain their selfish interests. When the people in the West sidelined religion on the ground of eliminating the obstacles to “rational life”, they meant the “religion” artificially made by religious leaders, which was against science, progress, rational freedom, justice, and innate human dignity. This state of affairs is not logical as far as Islam is concerned because it has given to man

p: 232

one of the two most indigenous civilizations in human history, which would be impossible without science, politics, economics and law.

In the future discussion, we will examine as elaborately as possible the untenable bases of the false notion of “the elimination of religion in mundane life” in Muslim societies.

Fifth point: The factors that contribute to “the elimination of religion in mundane life” in the West are simply erroneous and can never be consistent with the religion of Islam. The difference between Islam and the West lies in the meanings of life and politics (at least in the arena of social life) .

1. The common meaning of life in the present-day West is what exists in the natural world and remains free, based upon selfishness in satisfying natural instincts. which are controlled and molded for the benefit of social life, without specific beliefs which give meaning to life and justify the lofty goal, and without the need of possessing a sublime human character.

2. The common meaning of religion in the present-day West refers to a personal spiritual relationship between man and God and other supernatural truths, without having the least role in man’s mundane life.

3. The common meaning of politics in the present-day West refers to the management of the natural life of the people in the social arena toward the goals apparently chosen by their majority. In this definition of religion and politics, the need for religion in politics and its activity is totally absent because from their perspective, the people have no need at all for religion, whether in individual or social life.

In Islam, the meaning of the three realities is totally different: Human life refers to the activation of aptitudes towards perfection, through conscious searching, for the attainment of sublime goals. Covering each of the stages of life increases the motivation to move on to the next stage. The human being is the forerunner of this search; the being who originates from eternity, whose passageway is this purposeful world, and whose ultimate goal is to have a place in the Axis of Absolute Perfection in eternity. The Absolute Perfection’s breeze of love, grandeur and glory reinvigorates the creatures in the universe and kindles the light of the tortuous path of material and spiritual perfection. The beginning, and end of this life can be traced back to God:

﴿قُلْ إِنَّ صَلاتِی وَنُسُکِی وَمَحْیَایَ وَمَمَاتِی لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِینَ﴾

p: 233

“Say, ‘Indeed my prayer and my worship, my life and my death are all for the sake of Allah, the Lord of all the worlds’.”(1)

Islam’s definition of religion depends on three main pillars: The first pillar refers to the belief in the existence of the One and Only God, His supervision and dominance over the universe, and His absolute justice, which is beyond whims and caprice. He is the embodiment of all Attributes of Perfection, and has created the universe based on His wisdom providing man with two types of original guides (sound intellect and the prophets) to move toward perfection and enter into the Station of Beatific Vision (liqa’ Allah). Another is the belief in eternity, without which life and the entire universe will remain an enigmatic puzzle. These convictions depend on sound intellect and intrinsic perception.

The second pillar refers to the laws and practical program of activity leading man toward the sublime goal of life, which are called laws, duties and rights. It is anchored in two things:

1. Mandatory moral precepts which are prescribed for the acquisition of merits; and

2. Duties and Rights; duties include devotional decrees and personal duties in the arena of sociopolitical life, rights mean an advantage that can be utilized by a person. Meanwhile, decrees are also of two kinds: primary and secondary decrees. The primary decrees relate to the permanent needs while the secondary decrees pertain to the changing sources of welfare and corruption in life.

The third pillar refers to the subjects that include all the realities and phenomena that constitute life. With the exception of a very few cases, in all subjects Islam has given the choice to the people to deal with them with full attention, reflection, physical strength, desires, and legitimate demands.

In Islam, politics means management of human life both in the individual and collective spheres for the attainment of the most sublime material and spiritual goals. The beliefs and practical laws intend to organize and reform humanity with respect to the four types of relationship. From the Islamic perspective, any thing or phenomenon, which can be utilized for the organization and welfare of human life, within the said four types of

p: 234

relationship, is regarded as an integral part of religion.

p: 236

“rational life”, which brings to perfection all dimensions of human life. Thus, we can say that there is no inconsistency in Ibn Khaldūn’s view.

1. Embodiment (tajsīm): that is, to regard something as not existing and nothing as something that exists, or to regard certain things as different things. The best examples of tajsīm are the various shows in theaters and the like, in which the viewers tend to consider the actors, and appearances in the scene to be real and to behave accordingly. For instance, someone plays the role of the late Mīrza Taqī Khan Amīr Kabīr(1) and other people play the role of his enemies and murderers while all the viewers are certain that the former is not the real Amīr Kabīr and the latter are not his real enemies and murderers. Yet, all these viewers treat what just happened to Amīr Kabīr as something undesirable. This is the power of the imagination.

2. Discovery or disclosure (iktishaf): it refers to any phenomenon which cannot be interpreted within the context of scientific rules. In the words of Claude Bernard(2) on the introduction to [the study of] experimental medicine,

“No specific rule or instruction can be presented which holds that at the time of observing a certain thing by the researcher, a correct and fruitful idea which will serve as a sort of prior guide of the mind on the correct [method of] research would come into being. It is only after the existence or appearance of the idea that one can say how to set it according to the specific instructions of the stated logical rules, which no researcher is allowed to violate. But the reason behind its appearance is unclear and its nature is completely personal and something special, which is regarded as a source of creativity, invention and ingenuity of someone.”(3)

The overwhelming majority of the authorities in science have accepted the role of intuitive perceptions in the discoveries and inventions, and anyone who possesses such capabilities or, who has actually observed only an instance of them, acknowledges the role of intuition in the discoveries.

p: 240

3. Knowledge by presence (‘ilm-e huzūrī) (self-awareness or self-consciousness): This can be experienced by anyone who is self-conscious. In this extraordinary happening, the perceiver is also the perceived, which refers to the “I” or person. In the words of Shaykh Mahmūd Shabistarī, “This situation is similar to the man with eyes who must see himself without the instrumentality of his own eyes!”

عدم آیینه عالم عکس و انسان چو چشم عکس در وی شخص پنهان

تو چشم عکسی و او نور دیده است به دیده دیده را هرگز که دیده است

Absent is the mirror, and the universe is like a reflection.

Someone is hidden in him, like the eye of the reflection.

You are the eye of the reflection, and He is the light of the eyes;

Who has ever seen that true light with his eyes?(1)

4. Intellection (ta‘aqqul): it refers to thinking in the light of the established principles and laws for the attainment of one’s goals in an intellectual activity. It utilizes abstracted generalities for harmonizing different cases and since perception of general cases necessitates perception of abstracted realities, it follows that the person in question also engages in a metaphysical activitiy in the process.

5. Willpower (ikhtiyar): this is one of the most magnificent powers that man possesses to manage life. It is even above the sensible things, which one compares and contrasts. For this reason, he gives a noble form to his work, which is beyond natural outputs in the bodily dimension.

6. Self-assessment and self-examination: anyone with a sound mind can examine and assess his bodily limbs and give preference to one limb over another. Such a person can examine and assess his inward powers, abilities and activities. For example, Are my feelings sound? Is my thinking or intellection correct? Do my psychological activities follow the correct process? Do my faculties and aptitudes harmoniously work together? This examiner is the person himself.

There are people who would say that such examination may be traceable to one of our unknown mental powers and there is reason for the sole existence of the person. This possibility is only correct when a person sets all his

p: 241

limbs, faculties and aptitudes for qualitative and quantitative comparison with one another, for the assumption is that they—inward and outward—have all been examined.

If we assume that assessment in this regard is related to an unknown mental power who or what is the assessor? Whoever or whatever he or it is, definitely is greater than all the given powers. This refers to the same “I” (human being). This is an example of the proofs that establish the solitude of the “I” (human being). According to some people, the proofs are more than sixty. If we disregard such activities by the sole “I” and say it is natural to “separate religion and politics” in human life, it follows that we have disregarded the incurable pain of self-alienation, which is the illness of the twentieth century. The conclusion of this discussion is that the elimination of religion from the mundane life leaves the human being in the hands of events, which are constantly changing, and negates the primacy and inalterability of religion, which originates from beyond nature.

7. The nobility of “I” over the universe: There is no doubt that by acquiring sublime gnosis, the wary human beings occupy a sort of lofty station of epiphany with which they inwardly perceive the entire universe through knowledge by presence. They can even perceive their existence as part of the whole system of the universe.

The first thinker who has pointed out the basis of the fact that the “I” (human being) is above nature (“sublime isolation”) is Nasir Khusrū al-Qubadiyanī.(1) He thus says:

عقل ما بر آسیا کی پاداشا گشتی چنین گرنه عقل مردمی از کل خویش اجزاستی

8. The human being, in addition to the potential he possesses, has something stable and constant in the midst of changes. If a person has committed suicide even a hundred years ago, he is a criminal and courts of justice in the world shall treat him as such although his physical dimensions have already undergone so many changes. Perhaps the source of primordiality of the self stems from the same element (its essence’s inalterability). That the human being relies on a stable and accepted principle throughout his life in relation to every sort of event, in doing any action and in uttering anything, is related

p: 242

to the same inalterable element. At the same time,

هر نفس نو ﻣﻲشود دنیا و ما ﺑﻲخبر از نو شدن اندر بقا

عمر همچون جوی نونو ﻣﻲرسد مستمری ﻣﻲنماید در جسد

Every moment the world is renewed, and we are unaware of its being renewed, while it remains (the same in appearance).

Life is ever arriving anew, like the stream, though in the body it has the semblance of continuity.(1)

That is, although the human being is linked with the changes, he always inclines to stability and inalterable principles.

قرنها بگذشت و این ق-رن نُویس--ت

ماه آن ماه اس--ت و آب آن آب نیس-ت

عدل آن عدل است و فضل آن فضل هم

لیک مستبدل ش--د این ق-رن و ام--م

ق---رن ها بر قرنها رف-ت ای هم--ام

وی--ن معان--ی بر ق--رار و ب--ر دوام

شد مب--دّل آب ای-ن ج--و چند ب--ار

عک-س م---اه و عک--س اخت-ر برقرار

پ--س بنای--ش نیس--ت بر آب روان

بلک-----ه بر اقط---ار اوج آسم---ان

Generations have passed away, and this is a new generation: the moon is the same moon, the water is not the same water.

The justice is the same justice, and the learning is the same learning too; but those generations and peoples have been changed (supplanted by others).

Generations on generations have gone, O sir, but these Ideas (Divine Attributes) are permanent and everlasting.

The water in this channel has been changed many times: the reflexion

p: 243

of the moon and of the stars remains unaltered.

Therefore, its foundation is not in the running water; nay, but in the regions whose breadth is that of Heaven.(1)

Limiting the human being and his activities on the changes and transformations of things in the world is tantamount to his extinction.

will then be dealing with a complex dangerous being that calls ‘itself’ ‘human’.

Based upon these descriptions, elimination of sublime morality from the life of the human beings is exactly equal to their needlessness of it and non-existence of that truth (morality). This same truth has made them distinct from animals. No doubt, life “minus religion” (secularism), whose edifice is based upon selfishness limited by the absence of transgressing upon the right of others to live, has no room for constructive personal morality.

Elimination of religion from human life based on secularism necessitates undermining of the unity of “rational life” and “personality”.

Limiting high ideals of human activities to the disjointed and fleeting worldly aspects and eliminating religion from them is exactly like persuading the human being to witness particular tangible things, which are registered in the human mind through sensory perceptions and experiments. If human intellect did not organize and abstract the law from those tangible things, it would be impossible for human beings to discern scientific laws in the universe. With the elimination of religion, human life will lose the ability to present the fundamental laws and methods of a goal-oriented life.

The greatest havoc wrought by eliminating religion from human life is the division of human life and personality into the mundane and spiritual aspects!

It is impossible for “rational life”, whose main root stems from a higher world to end in a lower world or, to be divisible, such that a part of it in this world is under the control of man, administering it according to his inclinations and ideals while providing for the other part as its otherworldly part! One can easily perceive the unity of the life and personality of man in both the worldly and otherworldly realms.

The salient features of secularism and the irreparable losses to the sublime values of humanity caused by the elimination of religion from man’s mundane life

A brief introduction to extremism and dissipation, which have engulfed humanity throughout history, will show that mankind is rarely able to understand both, and if ever it does, it can hardly consciously avoid both extremes. The most serious and destructive extremism committed by man with regard to realities is that which is against his own self. This deviation,

p: 245

which always leads to the formulation of deviant ideas in other aspects of his life, is going to extremes in assessing his self. We must therefore believe that as long as the root of this precarious deviation remains in his being, it is certain that deviant ideas and inclinations will deprive him of a “rational life” in this world and in the hereafter. In order to elucidate this point, we shall hereby provide examples in this discussion:

1. Man sometimes has extreme views about his own self, regarding it as the universe’s pick of the basket, and sometimes, bringing his self down as more dangerous than a preying beast!(1)

2. In the past, “slavery” had been the most fundamental principle of life and the cornerstone of all facets of life, such as law, morality, religion, economy, politics, culture, and others! Nowadays, the concept of “freedom”, which basically means emancipation from all religious and moral bounds, as well as,the other sublime human values has prevailed throughout (the so-called advanced) industrial societies. It is obvious that this extremism is the product of the earlier extremism or vice versa.

3. In the past, to be bound by the laws, duties and rights as well as extremist inclinations in the name of religion put some societies under so much pressure that even a window for free thinking could not be seen. Today, some people in society cannot even tolerate hearing religious expressions!

4. Yesterday, psychology had been regarded as a head without a body and today it is treated as a body without a head. That is, yesterday, human knowledge about his soul plunged him into the halo of abstract notions, and now into physiological, biological and behavioral concepts about which no sufficient investigation has ever been made. As such, psychology deals with all issues except the essence of the personal “I”.

5. Sometimes, extremism reaches a point of maintaining that economy has no importance in the conduct of human life. Another form of extremism propounds that the essence of life and the all-embracing reason behind the development in human life is only economy and nothing else!

p: 246

6. Pages of history are replete with these optimistic and pessimistic forms of extremism. It is true that going to extremes in any of the various human dimensions, permeates his other dimensions on account of the strong relationship among them, but in two cases the permeation of both forms of extremism into other dimension has wrought the greatest havoc to man and humanity:

a. Going to extremes in presenting and appraising the “mind,” “I,” “soul,” and “personality”.(1)

b. Going to extremes on the presentation and appraisal of religion which can cause derangement in knowing the salient features of all basic human values.

Now, we shall cite the salient features of the “separation of religion and politics” approach and its irreparable losses.

Our discussion pertains to the second example and losses, in terms of importance, not inferior to the first case, which is deviant thought on the basic nature of man. We do not know whether the thinkers were aware of the havoc wrought by the entry of secularism into the lives of people—havoc caused by the elimination of basic human values, which led to man’s alienation from the universe, fellow human beings, God, and above all, from himself.

and advances the inward axis of beauty to acquire a manifestation of Divine Beauty. The outward axis is physical, such as a beautiful bunch of flowers, fountains, moonlight, elegant penmanship, a golden voice, and the azure sky.

The inward axis is real, such as sublime emotions, clemency, benevolence, and egalitarianism. Any person with the said traits possesses rational inward beauty, whose pleasure is more sublime than that acquired from outward manifestations of beauty. In ultimately interpreting the essence and main source of beauty, no view except what we have mentioned is acceptable to the real experts. And it is clear that by removing religion (whose basic foundation is the belief in God) from the equation, we will not have any rational interpretation of beauty. Nizamī Ganjawī(1) says:

چون رسم حواله شد برسام رستی تو ز جهل و من ز دشنام

1. Justice in its true sense: We know that the meanings of justice are diverse because Divine justice in its actual sense emanates from His infinite wisdom. Legal justice signifies conforming an action or utterance to the prescribed law.

Justice in its moral sense denotes obeying the conscience to follow what is good and avoid wickedness, without relying and expecting any reward, or evading punishment. Justice, in its philosophical sense, connotes a lofty will manifested by the system of the universe. It is true that justice in its moral sense is a very desirable trait and the great sages of both the East and the West have regarded it as one of the factors that contribute to human perfection, but when one analyzes the common conscience, he also perceives the pleasure from doing so. This is because seeking metaphysical pleasure also has an element of selfishness. Thus, it is the brigand for most of the people along the path of perfection. Therefore, justice in its moral sense stems from the common conscience, whose activities have a sublime manifestation and transcend pleasures and sufferings.

2. Personal freedom up to the sublime degree of freewill: Natural life wishes to preserve the human essence, attract sources of pleasure and repel sources of harm. This “natural self” has no work other than selfishly satisfying natural urges, and if a person fails to transcend the “natural self”, even if he

p: 248

has the most beautiful outward appearance, he cannot bring the potential of the “sublime I” to fruition. For this reason, all religions with divine origin have emphatic admonitions to transcend the “natural self” to achieve the “sublime I”.

In the words of the Commander of the Faithful ‘Alī ibn Abī Talib (‘a),

عِبَادَالله، إِنَّ مِنْ أَحَبَّ عِبَادَالله إِلَیهِ عَبْداً أَعَانَهُ الله عَلی نَفْسَهُ.

“O servants of Allah! The best of Allah’s servants in His sight is he who helps Allah with regard to himself (his self-building).”(1)

According to the divine perspective, without molding the “sublime I,” a person is an animal, nay, lower than that:

﴿لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ لَّا یَفْقَهُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ أَعْیُنٌ لَّا یُبْصِرُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ ءَاذَانٌ لَّا یَسْمَعُونَ بِهَآ ۚ أُولئِکَ کَٱلْأَنْعَمِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ ۚ أُولئِکَ هُمُ ٱلْغَفِلُونَ﴾

“They have hearts with which they do not understand, they have eyes with which they do not see, they have ears with which they do not hear. They are like cattle; rather they are more astray. It is they who are the heedless.”(2)

The basic factor for the elevation of man from the “natural self” to the “sublime human I” is to be situated in the Axis of Absolute Perfection which refers to God, the Exalted. This is because any plus point which is considered the “goal of life” in this world is inferior to the “sublime I”.

The clearest proof of this claim is that if a person evaluates the things he acquires such as wealth, position, impressive mansion, wholesome assets, social status, and even knowledge and artistic talent, he will see that compared to the greatness, and expanse of the “sublime I”, these things are insignificant.

Those who possess “personality” or the “sublime I” know well that before obtaining it, every material and worldly goal seems so attractive. But, once it is obtained he will continue his journey to perfection until he reaches the Axis of Absolute Perfection. This Absolute Perfection refers to God who cannot be limited within the domain of “I”. Mawlana Rūmī says,

p: 249

لطف شیر و انگبین عکس دل است

هر خوشی را آن خوش از دل حاصل است

پس بود دل جوهر و عالم عرض

سایه دل چون بود دل را غرض

The deliciousness of milk and honey is the reflection of the (pure) heart: from that heart the sweetness of every sweet thing is derived.

Hence the heart is the substance, and the world is the accident: how should the heart’s shadow (reflection) be the object of the heart’s desire?(1)

Real freedom (beyond the unrestrained liberty which is a product of such fatal formulas as “I want it; therefore it is right!”) is so great that it will save him from the shackles of fleeting worldly inclinations and not allow him to focus on “freedom” as the absolute goal of life. At the same time, it will guide him until he reaches the Axis of Absolute Perfection.

It is through this journey to perfection that a person transcends“freedom” to achieve “freewill”. And, by delivering “freedom” from the domain of material values, and self-centeredness, will transform it into God-centeredness, curb selfishness and turn it into a means of perfection of one’s being. In human history, no influential personality has been able to really render service to humanity without attaining the lofty degree of freewill (doing good deeds and enjoying freedom along the path of goodness and perfection).

3. Self-sacrifice in rendering service to humanity: One of the essential features of secularism is negating any type of self-sacrifice for the welfare of the people in society, particularly those altruistic acts that lead to one’s suffering, persecution and even death. No loftier value can reciprocate this sublime human quality. That soul is great which, for the sake of saving the lives of others or their welfare, prefers to die an honorable death than to live a humiliating life.

4. Noble sense of the unity of humanity: Since the beginning of social life and people’s acquaintance with one another, there has been a noble sense of

p: 250

unity among mankind. This feeling exists in every person who is not an egoist. The activities of mundane life are founded on the edifice of egoism and an egoist only considers himself worthy to live; he does not have such a feeling nor even entertain such an idea in his mind.

This claim is based upon an inalterable principle that the stronger the hold of materialism in a person, the more he is susceptible to contradiction and inconsistency. Therefore, attaining harmony and unity of the members of human race as well as transcend materialism is essential. The contents of the couplets below explain the above:

چون ازیشانشان مجتمع بینی دو یار

هم یکی باشند و هم ششصد هزار بر مثال

موجها اعدادشان

در عدد آورده باشد بادشان

مفترق شد آفتاب جانها

در درون روزن ابدانها

چون نظر در قرص داری خود یکیست

وآنک شد محجوب ابدان در کیست

When you see two of them meet together as friends, they are one, and at the same time, six hundred thousand.

Their numbers are in the likeness of waves: the wind will have brought them into number (into plurality from unity).

The Sun, which is the spirit, broke into rays in the windows, which are bodies.

When you gaze on the Sun’s disk, it is itself one, but he that is screened by (his perception of) the bodies, is in some doubt.(1)

جان گرگان و سگان هر یک جداست / متحد جانهای شیران خداست

The souls of wolves and dogs are separate, every one; the souls of the

p: 251

Lions of God are united.(1)

تفرقه در روح حیوانی بود

نفس واحد روح انسانی بود

چون که حَقْ رَشَّ عَلَیْهِمْ نُورَه

مفترق هرگز نگردد نور او

Separation (plurality) is in the animal spirit; the human spirit is one essence.

Inasmuch as ‘God sprinkled His light upon them (mankind), (they are essentially one): His light never becomes separated (in reality).(2)

روح انسانی کنفس واحده است روح حیوانی سفال جامده است

عقل جز از رمز این آگاه نیست واقف این سِرّ بجز الله نیست

عقل را خود با چنین سودا چه کار؟ کرّ مادر زاد را سُرنا چکار؟

The human soul is like a single body while the animal soul is a solid earthenware.

None is aware of this enigma except the intellect, and none is knowledgeable of this secret except Allah.

What has the intellect to do with such transaction? What does a congenitally blind donkey to do with a cart?(3)

It can be noticed that Rūmī believes that the intellect, which relies on the sensory perceptions and submits to the “natural self”, is incapable of perceiving the unity of human souls. In order to perceive this sublime reality, a sublime understanding, which can grasp the meaning of “God sprinkled His light upon them (mankind)” (haqq rashsha ‘alayhim nūrah) is necessary. Hence, in order to attain such unity and perceive the enjoyment of the bounty of the Divine Light, the sublime immaterial aptitude of man must reach the level of his potential (fi‘liyyah).

p: 252

5. Reply to the fundamental six questions of man on the four types of relationship (man’s relationship with himself, God, the universe, and his fellow human beings) are the following:

Who am I?

Where have I come from?

Where have I come?

With whom am I?

What have I come for?

Where will I go?

It is impossible to give the ultimate answers to these six questions without referring to religion.

6. The purity of conscience and its power: The secularists believe that people are capable of managing all the material, psychological and spiritual facets of their lives, and do not need the elements beyond mundane life, and that there is no need of the purity of conscience for total control, it must be removed from life. This is because a clean conscience, which is the compass of the ship of human being in the ocean of existence, totally opposes self-centeredness, the basis of mundane life with the dual power of attracting pleasure and avoiding pain. How can the luminous human conscience, which is the direct messenger of God in the midst of people, work along with self-centeredness which is based upon “The end justifies the means”, and “Since I like it, therefore, it is right”?

Two individuals—an extremely wicked and an extremely good—shall be identified by the presence or absence of conscience.

No being has as much diversity among its individuals as human beings. All human beings throughout history have shared the same internal and external organs; they were all called “humans”. For the same human beings, which generally include both the lowest of the low and the nearest of the near have been extolled beyond limit,. Some have even regarded man as worthy of worship!

p: 253

In his reply to my letter (about the contradiction existing on this issue), Bertrand Russell(1) wrote:

“Man can satisfy the sense of perfection and yearning for the Sublime Being (God) with humanitarianism!”

For me, it is not clear whether or not Russell, who has unconditionally elevated man to be worthy of divine love and the status of divinity, had read about individuals such as Nero, Caligula, Attila,(2) Genghis Khan, Hulagu Khan, and Tamerlane whose likes have been many in human history.

Yes, Nero had a pair of eyes, eyebrows, hands, and feet just like Socrates.(3) Similarly, the bodily limbs of Ibn Muljim Muradī(4) and Imam ‘Alī ibn Abī Talib (‘a) had no difference at all in terms of anatomical constitution. But the inward nature of these two individuals, because of having or lacking a conscience, made them poles apart.

The infinite magnificence of the conscience defies any description except that it is a divine manifestation. Is it not an insult to humanity when we say, that humanity must only use this trustworthy messenger of God to confess or claim in courts? In other words, should conscience be only a spare part in implementing a legal item?

7. In secularism, there is no need for any motive except providing for the needs of mundane life while implementing laws related to the realities of the

p: 254

second dimension (social mundane life, such as law, economics, etc.),(1). What is needed are purely natural motives to benefit from the bodily members and continue their functions. For this reason, to abide with the laws of the said realities (legal code, economics, politics, and the like) is acceptable to the strong as long as doing so is profitable and not doing so is unprofitable, otherwise the existence and non-existence of those realities are the same for them. When a person, who believes in “eliminating religion from mundane life” says, that he respects the laws governing those realities, eother he is a hypocrite and makes use of this claim to advance his Machiavellian interest, or he definitely is an illusionist. We have heard the famous proverb that “The law is a cobweb” and strong animals like the lion, leopard and even the mouse are never caught in it.

8. In secularism, the necessity of revolutions and progressive movements by offering sacrifices even to the extent of giving one’s life is meaningless and futile. This is because its goal is nothing but organizing mundane life. In this system, man himself is not discussed as a being capable of attaining essential excellence and perfection, for this must be sidelined on the same basis that religion is removed. It is for this reason that the contemporary legal systems, including those seemingly global ones, have no concern with the realities related to perfection (wisdom, virtue, etc.).

Usually, legal provisions are based on the principle that human beings are brothers and equal in terms of nobility and honor! It is not mentioned that this equality is only in the superstructure of natural life, otherwise the difference among human beings in terms of morality, wisdom, nobility, and acquired honor is infinite. For example, one says, “How I wish, all people have only one head and neck, and with only a single strike of the sword, I could have extinguished them.”(2)

Another person says,

وَاللهِ لَوْ أُعْطِیتُ الاََْقَالِیمَ السَّبْعَةَ بِمَا تَحْتَ أَفْلاَکِهَا، عَلَی أَنْ أَعْصِیَ اللهَ فِی نَمْلَةٍ أَسْلُبُهَا جِلْبَ شَعِیرَةٍ مَا فَعَلْتُهُ.

“By Allah, even if I am given all the domains of the seven (stars) with

p: 255

all that exists under the skies in order that I may disobey Allah to the extent of snatching one grain of barley from an ant I would not do it.”(1)

9. In secularism, the value of responsibility and duty perishes in conforming life with the realities of the second dimension (such as law, economics, politics, and the like). We can witness human beings downgraded today, to the level of lifeless cogwheels. As admonished by the religions with divine origin and the great sages of both the East and the West, one can perceive his real value from the same sense of responsibility of the profiteers and egoists. Consider, for example, the expression below:

“O duty! O great and high name! You are not pleasing and charming (because one has to exert effort to discharge you), but you ask people to obey, and you shake the will of some, bringing the self to what it abhors. You do not frighten it, but you only enact a law which penetrates into the self, and even if we do not obey it, willy-nilly, we respect it. And, all inclinations, although in the end one acts against it, submit to it.

“O duty! What is your due base, and from what did you originate? What can your noble racial root be found in, that, with utmost magnanimity of kinship it totally avoids inclinations, and the condition of compulsoriness of the real value of people, that they could give themselves, emanates from the same basis or root.

“Being part of the perceptible world, indeed, man goes beyond himself through that basis which connects him to something which only reason can perceive. That basis is indeed man’s personality; that is, his autonomy and independence vis-à-vis the instrument of nature.”(2)

If the “elimination of religion from mundane life” approach had rendered only the blow of removing the spirit of responsibility, which emanates from man’s perfect-seeking personality, it is enough ground for humanity to turn away from this approach and rescue the human personality from this perilous idea.

10. In secularism, due to them all moving along the path of the “rational life”, how can a person, who knows that no part of nature and no process in

p: 256

the universe is devoid of law, continue his life without law? Essentially related to his personality is intrinsic respect for the law, continuous efforts and endeavor for advancement and perfection, a noble sense of responsibility, and the unity of personality!

11. Fraternity and equality of human beings: After secularism alienatied them from one another, and subjected them to “self-alienation” by negating morality and religion from their lives, and went to the extent of plunging them into the dark pit of “Man is a wolf for man,”(1) can human beings still be presented as brothers to one another?! Have the framers of Western human rights answered this question?

12. Don’t you know that by negating sublime human values and principles, all lines and words about the greatness, honor and dignity of man, written in millions of volumes of Eastern and Western books, are being falsified?! Man has incurred a wound no medicine can heal!

p: 257

p: 258

- Unilateral obligations (īqa‘at), and

- Politics (siyasah).

It is clear that Shahīd al-Awwal has divided jurisprudence into the said sections according the views of all jurisprudents (fuqaha) and not according to his personal opinion alone.(1)

b) Books which have been written exclusively about political philosophy. Take, for example, the following titles:

- Makatīb al-Rasūl compiled by ‘Alī ibn al-Husayn Ahmadī. This volume includes different types of political decrees and religious-moral admonitions in Islam as narrated from the Holy Prophet s;

- Al-Watha’iq al-Siyasiyyah compiled by Dr. Muhammad Hamīd Allah Haydarabadī. In this treatise, some political dimensions of Islam are traced from the Holy Prophet s;

- A considerable number of the sermons and letters of the Commander of the Faithful (‘a) recorded in Nahj al-Balaghah compiled by the late Sayyid al-Razī, particularly the blessed instruction to Malik al-Ashtar, an analysis and exposition of which has been made in one of the volumes of Tarjumeh wa Tafsīr-e Nahj al-Balaghah (“A Translation and Commentary on Nahj al-Balaghah”);

- Al-Ahkam al-Saltaniyyah wa’l-Walayat Jam‘ bayn al-Masa’il al-Shar‘iyyah wa ’s-Siyasiyyah written by Aqza ’l-Qazat Abū’l-Hasan ‘Alī ibn Habīb al-Basrī al-Baghdadī al-Mawardī (died 450 AH);

- Al-Kharaj authored by Qazī Abū Yūsuf ibn Ibrahīm;

- Al-Amwal written by Abū ‘Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Salam (died 224 AH);

- Ma‘alim al-Qurriyyah fī Ahkam al-Hasabah authored by Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Qurshī, known as Ibn al-Ikhwah;

- Al-Ahkam al-Saltaniyyah written by Abū Ya‘la Muhammad ibn al-Husayn al-Farra’;

- Kitab al-Fakhrī ’l-adab al-Saltaniyyah wa ’d-Duwal al-Islamiyyah authored by Muhammad ibn ‘Alī ibn Tabataba, known as Ibn

p: 260

Taqtaqī;

- Siyasatnameh by Khwajah Nizam al-Mulk;(1)

- Al-Walat wa ’l-Quzat written by Kindī;

- Al-Kharaj wa San‘at al-Kitab authored by Quddamah ibn Ja‘far;

- Al-Siyasat al-Madīnah by Muhammad ibn Muhammad Turkhan al-Farabī;

- ara Ahl al-Madīnat al-Fazilah written by Muhammad ibn Muhammad Turkhan al-Farabī;

- Akhlaq-e Nasirī authored by Khwajah Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī;(2)

- Fiqh al-Siyasah by Sayyid Muhammad Husaynī Shīrazī;(3)

- Al-Imamah wa ’s-Siyasah written by Abū Muhammad ‘Abd Allah ibn Muslim ibn Qutaybah Daynūrī (died 213 AH);

- Tanbīh al-Imamah wa Tanzīh al-Millah authored by ayatullah al-‘Uzma aqa Mīrza Muhammad Husayn Na’īnī;

- Hukūmat az Nazar-e Islam by ayatullah aqa Sayyid Mahmūd Taliqanī, a commentary on the late Na’īnī’s Tanbīh al-Imamah wa Tanzīh al-Millah;

- Tarīkh-e Siyasī wa Dīnī wa Farhangī dar Islam, 3 volumes, compiled by Dr. Hasan Ibrahīm Hasan;

- Al-Muqaddimah written by ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Khaldūn;(4)

p: 261

p: 262

p: 263

p: 264

- Falsafeh-ye Siyasī-ye Islam authored by Dr. ‘Askarī Huqūqī;

- Al-Islam wa ’l-Hazarat al-‘Arabiyyah by Kurd ‘Alī;

- Al-Islam wa ’t-Takamul al-Ijtima‘ī written by Shaykh Mahmūd Shaltūt;

- Al-Siyasah Min Waqi‘a ’l-Islam authored by Sayyid Sadiq Shīrazī;

- Al-Hazarat al-Islamiyyah by Adam Mitch (?), translated by Muhammad ‘Abd al-Hadī Abū Raydah;

- Tamaddun-e Islam dar Gharb (Islamic Civilization in the West) written by Gustave Le Bon;(1)

- Tarīkh-e Tamaddun-e Islamī authored by Jurjī Zaydan;

- Al-Fikr al-Islamī wa ’l-Mujtama‘a’l-Mu‘asir fī Mushkilat al-Hukm wa ’t-Tawjīh by Dr. Albahī;

- Al-Islam al-Nazm al-Insanī written by Dr. Mustafa Rafi‘ī;

- Al-Fikr al-Islamī wa ’t-Tatawwar authored by Fathī ‘Uthmanī;

- Andīsheh-ye Siyasī dar Islam-e Mu‘asir by Hamīd ‘Inayat;

- Falsafeh-ye Siyasī-ye Islam written by Dr. Abū ’l-Fazl ‘Izzatī;

- Al-Lawami‘ al-Ilahiyyah(2) which is an important discourse by Fazil Miqdad;

- ‘Awa’id al-Ayyam authored by Mulla Ahmad Naraqī;(3)

- Kitab al-Siyasah by Qudamah ibn Ja‘far;

- Adab al-Sultan written by Abū ’l-Hasan ‘Alī ibn Nasr;

p: 262

- Kitab al-Siyasah al-Kabīr authored by Ahmad ibn Sahl Abū Zayd al-Balkhi

- Kitab al-Siyasah al-Saghīr by Ahmad ibn Sahl Abū Zayd al-Balkhī;(1)

- Kitab al-Dawlah written by Abū Ishaq Ibrahīm ibn al-‘Abbas al-Sawlī;(2)

- Siyasat al-Mulūk authored by Abū Dalaf al-Qasim ibn ‘Īsa ibn Ma‘qal.(3)

How can a civilization to come into being and achieve a significant height of advancement and progress without having a rational political system?!(4)

During the early period of the advent of Islam, and even in the succeeding centuries, a specified code of laws had not been framed because human life in Islam has a very significant reason, which the Muslim religious authorities know, and that is, the unity of all dimensions of human life (economic, political, legal, moral, artistic, etc.).

It is for this reason that the political discourses compiled in distinct book forms, or available to the Muslim thinkers and scholars as a section in jurisprudence (fiqh), are in reality the schema of one of the dimensions of the Islamic school of thought. The importance of the political dimension of man in Islam, will be pointed out to some extent in this book. According to the tradition, “Whoever wakes up without having any concern for the affairs of Muslims is not a Muslim”, a lack of participation in organizing the social lives of people is a deviation from the way of Islam. Islam has the best formula to organize and manage the rational lives of people.

All the known Qur’anic verses on the exigency of justice (‘adl) and fairness (qist) (15 verses on justice and 18 on fairness) and those that affirm removing impediments to rational life to achieve “freedom”, are sufficient to establish the importance given by Islam to the man’s political dimension in life. Some Qur’anic verses indicate that the most important purpose behind

p: 266

the apostleship (risalah) of the prophets of God is the emergence of justice and equity. For example, this passage:

﴿لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلَنَا بِالْبَیِّنَاتِ وَأَنزَلْنَا مَعَهُمُ الْکِتَابَ وَالْمِیزَانَ لِیَقُومَ النَّاسُ بِالْقِسْطِ﴾

“Certainly We sent Our apostles with manifest proofs, and We sent down with them the Book and the Balance, so that mankind may maintain justice.”(1)

What is the reason that the importance given to the issues of political philosophy of Islam has no detailed scientific and jurisprudential framework nor is it practically observed?

First of all, it must be borne in mind that the governments and the rulers who have held the reigns of government according to the Sunnī school of thought used to deal with the issues in Islam according to the Sunnī notions of politics. In most Muslim societies until the recent time, the Shī‘ah school of thought had no practical power in political matters, so the jurisprudents (fuqaha) and authorities did not feel the need to discuss the political issues. However, they have been examined in some sections of jurisprudence, philosophy and theology, thereby, categorically affirming the vital importance of thinking about governing society. I have dealt with some of these subjects in the commentary on the blessed instruction of Imam ‘Alī (‘a) to Malik al-Ashtar in the book Hikmat-e Usūl-e Siyasī-ye Islam (The Wisdom behind the Political Principles of Islam).

Reasons why the worldly aspects of life, like the spiritual aspects, are an integral part of the religious laws according to Islamic sources.

If the worldly aspects of life, like the spiritual aspects, were not an integral part of religious laws, all the religious admonitions, emphases and instructions to uproot corruption on earth would not have been revealed. Take, for example, the following two verses:

﴿ٱلَّذِینَ یَنقُضُونَ عَهْدَ ٱللَّهِ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مِیثَقِهِۦ وَیَقْطَعُونَ مَآ أَمَرَ ٱللَّهُ بِهِۦٓ أَن یُوصَلَ وَیُفْسِدُونَ فِی ٱلْأَرْضِ ۚ أُولئِکَ هُمُ ٱلْخَسِرُونَ﴾

“…those who break the covenant made with Allah after having pledged it solemnly, and sever what Allah has commanded to be joined, and cause corruption on the earth— it is they who are the

p: 267

losers.”(1)

﴿إِنَّمَا جَزَاء الَّذِینَ یُحَارِبُونَ اللّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَیَسْعَوْنَ فِی الأَرْضِ فَسَادًا أَن یُقَتَّلُواْ أَوْ یُصَلَّبُواْ أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَیْدِیهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُم مِّنْ خِلافٍ أَوْ یُنفَوْاْ مِنَ الأَرْضِ ذَلِکَ لَهُمْ خِزْیٌ فِی الدُّنْیَا وَلَهُمْ فِی الآخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِیمٌ﴾

“Indeed the requital of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle, and to try to cause corruption on the earth, is that they shall be slain or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off from opposite sides or be banished from the land. That is a disgrace for them in this world, and in the Hereafter there is a great punishment for them.”(2)

The Noble Qur’an, has given the order to uproot corruption on earth 41 times in different forms. If religion had nothing to do with matters pertaining to mundane life, the moral and legal emphases of the Qur’an on fighting against corruption would have been meaningless, because people usually understand the abomination of corruption and know that it is impossible to live amidst corruption and the corrupt.

The notion, that the religious order to fight against corruption is meant for a mental case, does not hold water, because most agents of corruption and their followers do not regard their acts as a form of corruption. In fact, the egoists imagine that what they do is something meritorious!

Throughout history, we encounter hundreds of false interpretations and justifications of corruption through which its agents exonerate themselves for their wicked acts. And in many cases, they describe their filthy acts, bloodshed and transgressions of rights as campaigns against corruption!

Religion maintains that it is the function of a sound mind and pure nature to determine what constitutes corruption and who its agent is, as in determining other things, and not by those who consider themselves rightful even if they have annihilated half of humanity.

There is an emphatic order to compete in good works (khayrat), as this Qur’anic verse shows:

﴿وَلِکُلٍّۢ وِجْهَةٌ هُوَ مُوَلِّیهَا ۖ فَٱسْتَبِقُوا۟ ٱلْخَیْرَتِ ۚ﴾

p: 268

“Everyone has a cynosure to which he turns; so take the lead in all good works.”(1)

There are two important points in this noble verse:

The word khayrat embraces all

types of goodness—individual and collective, material and spiritual,

worldly and otherworldly. Anyone who thinks that the word khayrat

only includes that which is otherworldly is either ignorant of Arabic language

or someone who resorts to the “logic of rationalization” in order to

advance his own interest.(2)

The same important rule we have

mentioned in interpreting the first item is also applicable here. That is,

in most cases, a person or a group regards as good whatever he or it likes

out of selfishness, though it may be a wicked act or thing, whereas, the

divine religion’s admonitions and orders are based upon “real goodness”.

The permission to utilize useful things on earth for subsistence and organization of life:

﴿یَا أَیُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ کُلُوا۟ مِمَّا فِی ٱلْأَرْضِ حَلَالاً طَیِّبًا﴾

“O mankind! Eat of what is lawful and pure in the earth.”(3)

This point has been mentioned in the Noble Qur’an 16 times. Human beings who live consciously in this world—believing there is harm in consuming certain food and drinking items, refrain from doing so—should also do the same with regards to actions, utterances and any connection with the world of nature. They should not consider themselves “free” and “open” to do or say anything in all the four types of relationship. Yet, given the probable harm or unpleasantness of an action, utterance or even thinking something, they do not even exercise rational precaution. It is based upon this rule that God says, “Whatever I have provided on earth is for your utility except if there is harm in doing so (physical or spiritual harm).”

Financial obligations are meant to organize the material dimension of life;

p: 269

for example, zakat, khums(1) and [other] known [financial] obligations are prescribed in a bid to eradicate poverty. Prevention of kanz (accumulation and amassing of gold, silver and other essential minerals as well as hoarding and embezzlement of wealth), usury (riba) and encroachment upon the property of orphans is also intended for the same purpose. In keeping with these obligations, rights have been prescribed. The poor and needy are entitled to receive zakat. Similar are the rights of those who are entitled to receive khums and other known financial obligations. The indigents of society also have the right to utilize withheld treasures. That is, the Muslim ruler is duty-bound to order the utilization of gold and silver which has been withheld at the expense of society’s welfare.

﴿إِنَّمَا ٱلصَّدَقَتُ لِلْفُقَرَآءِ وَٱلْمَسَکِینِ وَٱلْعَمِلِینَ عَلَیْهَا وَٱلْمُؤَلَّفَةِ قُلُوبُهُمْ وَفِی ٱلرِّقَابِ وَٱلْغَرِمِینَ وَفِی سَبِیلِ ٱللَّهِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِیلِ ۖ فَرِیضَةً مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ عَلِیمٌ حَکِیمٌ﴾

“Charities are only for the poor and the needy, and those employed to collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and for [the freedom of] the slaves and the debtors, and in the way of Allah, and for the traveler. [This is] an ordinance from Allah, and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.”(2)

This decree has been made obligatory by God, the All-wise and All-knowing.

﴿وَٱعْلَمُوٓا۟ أَنَّمَا غَنِمْتُم مِّن شَیْءٍۢ فَأَنَّ لِلَّهِ خُمُسَهُۥ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِی ٱلْقُرْبَی وَٱلْیَتَمَی وَٱلْمَسَکِینِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِیلِ إِن کُنتُمْ ءَامَنتُم بِٱللَّهِ﴾

“Know that whatever thing you may come by, a fifth of it is for Allah and the Apostle, for the relatives and the orphans, for the needy and the traveler, if you have faith in Allah.”(3)

﴿وَٱلَّذِینَ فِیٓ أَمْوَلِهِمْ حَقٌّ مَّعْلُومٌ ٭ لِّلسَّآئِلِ وَٱلْمَحْرُومِ﴾

“…and in whose wealth there is a known right for the beggar and the deprived…”(4)

﴿وَالَّذِینَ یَکْنِزُونَ الذَّهَبَ وَالْفِضَّةَ وَلاَ یُنفِقُونَهَا فِی سَبِیلِ اللّهِ فَبَشِّرْهُم بِعَذَابٍ أَلِیمٍ﴾

p: 270

“Those who treasure up gold and silver, and do not spend it in the way of Allah, inform them of a painful punishment.”(1)

﴿أَلْهَاکُمُ التَّکَاثُرُ ٭ حَتَّی زُرْتُمُ الْمَقَابِرَ﴾

“Rivalry [and vainglory] distracted you until you visited the graves.”(2)

﴿یَمْحَقُ ٱللَّهُ ٱلرِّبَوا۟ وَیُرْبِی ٱلصَّدَقَتِ ۗ﴾

“Allah brings usury to naught, but He makes charities flourish.”(3)

﴿وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا۟ مَالَ ٱلْیَتِیمِ إِلَّا بِٱلَّتِی هِیَ أَحْسَنُ﴾

“Do not approach the orphan’s property, except in the best [possible] manner.”(4)

Abidance with the terms of contracts as obligatory:

﴿وَٱلْمُوفُونَ بِعَهْدِهِمْ إِذَا عَهَدُوا۟ ۖ﴾

“…and those who fulfill their covenants, when they pledge themselves…”(5)

﴿وَأَوْفُوا۟ بِٱلْعَهْدِ ۖ إِنَّ ٱلْعَهْدَ کَانَ مَسْؤولاً﴾

“And fulfill the covenants; indeed all covenants are accountable.”(6)

﴿وَلَا تَبْخَسُوا۟ ٱلنَّاسَ أَشْیَآءَهُمْ﴾

“And do not cheat the people of their goods.”(7)

Law of retaliation (qisas);

Penal law (hudūd);

Blood-money and other fines (diyat);

Last will (wasiyyah);

Questions on inheritance (irth);

p: 271

The prohibition of accumulating wealth through illegitimate means;

Jihad;

Self-defense;

Marriage (nikah);

Divorce (talaq);

Trading and transactions;

Giving exact measures and weights;

The prohibition of hoarding (ihtikar);

The prohibition of selling weapons (except defensive arms) to hostile people;

Debt (dayn) and pertinent matters;

Mortgage (rahn);

Guarantee and surety (zimanah);

Peace and reconciliation (sulh);

Proxy and deputation (wikalah);

Renting (ijarah);

Partnership (shirkah);

Trusteeship and safekeeping (amanah);

Competition for exercise and wellbeing;

The prohibition of usurpation (ghasb);

Confession (iqrar);

Judgment and testimonies;

The prohibition of ignorance in direct encroachment with respect to property and other aspects of life;

Pious endowment (waqf);

Gift and donation (hibah);

Economic rules and principles;

p: 272

Legal rules and principles;

Political rules and principles;

Defining the relationship with non-Muslim minorities, communities and nationalities;

Organizing medical and health affairs; and

Organizing, altering or formulating things, which become part of life with the passage of time.

It is for this reason that we can divide Islamic jurisprudence into the following sections:

- Jurisprudence pertaining to the acts of worship (‘ibadah);

- Jurisprudence pertaining to personal matters;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to transactions, contracts and unilateral obligations;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to morality;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to politics and governance;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to mysticism and gnosticism;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to technology, industry and craftsmanship;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to international relations;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to culture;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to management and administration;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to jihad and defense;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to sciences;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to discoveries and inventions;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to penal law;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to other laws;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to the judiciary;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to injustice and oppression;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to undesirable acts and practices;

p: 273

- Jurisprudence pertaining to doing what is good;

-Jurisprudence pertaining to medical issues and questions;

- Jurisprudence pertaining to the future and prospective issues; and

- Jurisprudence pertaining to whatever happens in the world

Jurisprudential principles and rules based upon innate discernments and rational propositions and fundamentals, which elucidate all rights and obligations in life in this world and the hereafter(1)

The jurisprudential rules which refer to general propositions that justify human life in the material and spiritual domains and can be applied to many particular cases; for example, the rule of “neither loss nor harm” (la zarar wa la zarar) and the principle of the exigency of transactions. In acting upon these propositions, the mujtahid and the muqallid are the same. That is, they are both obliged to abide by them.

This is while in the rules of the principles of jurisprudence, only the jurisprudent (faqīh), after conducting a research and proving them, benefits from them in proving universal propositions in jurisprudence.

The principles and rules cited in jurisprudence can be generally divided into two:

1. The principles and rules provided for in the primary sources; for example, the rules of “negation of difficulty and trouble” (nafī ‘asar wa haraj) and “neither loss nor harm” as provided for in this Qur’anic verse:

﴿مَا یُرِیدُ اللَّهُ لِیَجْعَلَ عَلَیْکُمْ مِنْ حَرَجٍ﴾

“Allah does not desire to put you to hardship.”(2)

2. The principles and rules inferred by reliable proofs; for example, the preponderance of what is more important (ahamm) to what is important (muhimm) in cases of contradiction.

In jurisprudence, the ways of knowing realities differ in the modes of discovering them but all of them are either supported by the perception of pure nature, such as yaqīn (certainty) and qata‘ (suspension of judgment), or

p: 274

rational. Rational rulings such as exigencies that revoke the rulings’ requirement, and data whose being discovered is completed by the Legislator, such as Qur’anic verses whose indication of the reality is abstract and traditions whose issuance (being authentic) is not definite. However, by complementing their proofs through another means, their potential of revealing legal realities is rational.

Meanwhile, the principles that are cited to remove any confusion in doubtful cases, such as the principle of disavowal [of the polytheists] (bara’at) and the principle of preponderance of eliminating harm over gaining profit, are rational propositions although their being proofs can also be consolidated by the endorsement of the Islamic legislator.

In view of their functional scope in jurisprudence, jurisprudential rules can be generally divided into two:

General rules that can be implemented in

all sections (abwab) of jurisprudence

Particular rules that can be cited in

some sections of jurisprudence.

Examples of General Rules and Particular Rules have been given in detail on pages134 to 156

“knowledge” (‘ilm) as the meaning of Hukm.(1)

أَلْحُکْمُ أَعَمُّ مِنَ الْحِکْمَةِ فَکُلُّ حِکْمَةٍ حُکْمٌ وَلاَ عَکْسَ.

“Hukm includes hikmah (wisdom), and every hikmah is Hukm but not the opposite.”

This is because the meaning of hikmah expressed by the theosophers and Zubaydī is, “Hikmah means knowing the truths of things as they are, and acting upon what they require.” Hukm is one of the distinctive manifestations of hikmah, and if a man of wisdom, notwithstanding all the conditions for removing hostilities and managing the social life of people, refrains from ruling, he will be regarded as misguided from the viewpoint of the religious law. If it is used to purely mean knowledge, gnosis or wisdom, this is exceptional, and mean an essential preliminary to the “real Hukm” (the formulation of an obligation or recommended act or their opposites with regard to a thing), and not Hukm itself.

Qur’an.

3) Hukm here refers to the decrees issued by people, as indicated in this verse:

﴿وَإِذَا حَکَمْتُم بَیْنَ ٱلنَّاسِ أَن تَحْکُمُوا۟ بِٱلْعَدْلِۚ﴾

“…and, when you judge between people, judge with fairness”(1)

4) Hukm here originates from the Heavenly Book, as suggested by this passage:

﴿وَأَنزَلَ مَعَهُمُ ٱلْکِتَبَ بِٱلْحَقِّ لِیَحْکُمَ بَیْنَ ٱلنَّاسِ فِیمَا ٱخْتَلَفُوا۟ فِیهِۚ﴾

“And He sent down with them the Book with the truth, that it may judge between the people concerning that about which they differed.”(2)

This category can be observed in 3 instances in the Qur’an, and the “sovereignty of the Divine Book” means the settling of hostilities and removal of differences through the prophets (‘a), by considering the contents of the Book.

5) There are 3 verses of the Qur’an in which the word Hukm can be interpreted in its popular sense (adjudication, sovereignty and origination of do’s and don’ts) as well as in the sense of knowledge and wisdom:

﴿رَبِّ هَبْ لِی حُکْماً وَأَلْحِقْنِی بِٱلصَّلِحِینَ﴾

“My Lord! Grant me [unerring] judgment, and unite me with the Righteous.”(3)

In 3 verses of the Noble Qur’an, the said two possibilities exist.

﴿أُولَئِکَ الَّذِینَ آتَیْنَاهُمُ الْکِتَابَ وَالْحُکْمَ وَالنُّبُوَّةَ﴾

“They are the ones whom We gave the Book, the judgment and prophethood.”(4)

﴿یَا یَحْیَی خُذِ الْکِتَابَ بِقُوَّةٍ وَآتَیْنَاهُ الْحُکْمَ صَبِیًّا﴾

“‘O John!’ [We said,] ‘Hold on with power to the Book!’ And We

p: 277

gave him judgment while still a child.”(1)

Some have imagined that the Hukm God has endowed to Prophet Yahya (John the Baptist) (‘a) could not mean Hukm in its popular sense on the ground that, prior to the age of puberty, a person cannot exercise sovereignty. The reply is clear. Just as God bestowed the asset and position of prophethood and the acceptance of the Heavenly Book to Prophet ‘Īsa (Jesus) (‘a) a few days after his birth, so He bestowed the asset and aptitude of Hukm in its popular sense (adjudication, sovereignty and promulgation of do’s and don’ts) to Prophet Yahya (‘a). In the second verse above (Sūrat al-An‘am 6:89), the probability of Hukm in its popular sense is far stronger than Hukm as knowledge and wisdom, because they are implicit in the Book and prophethood. The purport of the verse is ruling, adjudication and promulgation of do’s and don’ts through the Book and prophethood, as indicated in these two other verses:

﴿وَأَنزَلَ مَعَهُمُ ٱلْکِتَبَ بِٱلْحَقِّ لِیَحْکُمَ بَیْنَ ٱلنَّاسِ فِیمَا ٱخْتَلَفُوا۟ فِیهِۚ﴾

“And He sent down with them the Book with the truth, that it may judge between the people concerning that about which they differed.”(2)

﴿إِنَّآ أَنزَلْنَا ٱلتَّوْرَةَ فِیهَا هُدًی وَنُورٌ ۚ یَحْکُمُ بِهَا ٱلنَّبِیُّونَ﴾

“We sent down the Torah containing guidance and light by which the prophets judged.”(3)

6) It consists of Qur’anic verses containing both Hukm (judgment) and ‘ilm (knowledge). Take, for example, these three passages:

﴿وَلُوطًا ءَاتَیْنَهُ حُکْماً وَعِلْماَ﴾

“We gave judgment and knowledge to Lot.”(4)

﴿فَفَهَّمْنَهَا سُلَیْمَنَ ۚ وَکُلًّا ءَاتَیْنَا حُکْماً وَعِلْماَۚ﴾

“We gave its understanding to Solomon, and to each We gave judgment and knowledge.”(5)

﴿وَلَمَّا بَلَغَ أَشُدَّهُۥ وَٱسْتَوَیٓ ءَاتَیْنَهُ حُکْماً وَعِلْماَ ۚ﴾

“When he (Moses) came of age and became fully matured, We gave him judgment and knowledge.”(6)

﴿وَلَمَّا بَلَغَ أَشُدَّهُۥٓ ءَاتَیْنَهُ حُکْماً وَعِلْماَۚ﴾

p: 278

“When he (Joseph) came of age, We gave him judgement and [sacred] knowledge.”(1)

If Hukm really meant knowledge (‘ilm) and gnosis (ma‘rifah), the word ‘ilm in the said verses would have been redundant.

If ever there is an instance in the Noble Qur’an where the word Hukm means knowledge and gnosis, this is to show the similarity between the meaning of Hukm (promulgation of do’s and don’ts) which pertains to one’s actions, and that of gnosis and realities which pertains to perception and understanding. Hukm in the sense of hikmah (wisdom) includes theoretical and practical wisdom, and Hukm in its popular sense is one of the most distinctive manifestations of practical wisdom.

There are other verses in the Qur’an explicitly stating the definite role of religion in the different aspects of human life. For example:

﴿لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلَنَا بِالْبَیِّنَاتِ وَأَنزَلْنَا مَعَهُمُ الْکِتَابَ وَالْمِیزَانَ لِیَقُومَ النَّاسُ بِالْقِسْطِ﴾

“Certainly We sent Our apostles with manifest proofs, and We sent down with them the Book and the Balance, so that mankind may maintain justice.”(2)

It is clear that the establishment of justice and the observance of the Balance and law are meant for the organization of the different facets of life.

The very important conclusion we can draw from this discussion is that Hukm in the sense of adjudication, governance and promulgation of do’s and don’ts is one of the distinctive features of the prophets of God and their genuine successors. And this principle is repugrant to the secularist way of thinking. In this regard, there are two important issues worth studying and investigating:

1. Hukūmah refers to the same wisdom and knowledge of the political issues and economic life of people, and nothing else.

p: 279

This point necessitates that the common statesmen following the

Machiavellian approach in administering their respective countries are not really worthy of governing the society because the motive of organizing the activities is based on the purely instinctive inclinations, and not anchored in the principles of the theoretical and practical wisdom, “the fundamentals and principles of the rational life”.

In selecting the goals and motives of such organizations and passing them through the filter of discreet forms of selfishness—whether for themselves or their subjects called “citizens,” they have nothing to do with wisdom as well as rational and inalterable values. In the same manner, in selecting the means for achieving those selected goals, they neither understand wisdom nor are concerned with any value. Of course, it is possible for these statesmen to somehow possess theoretical wisdom and statecraft, but it is clear that such realities are actually political activities by statesmen that are like neutral onlookers but without any right to enter the arena of political activity. It is for this reason that whenever a statesman is interpellated, he seeks refuge in the impenetrable fortress of “Sir, this is politics!” thereby slinecing the destitute ignoramuses.

2. Governance cannot be a kind of absolute rule and control over the people, let alone be a so-called religious guardianship and leadership!

It is clear that statecraft and politics do not imply the theoretical and practical wisdom as indicative of real wisdom; rather, the ruler or statesman must rule and supervise by utilizing them. He must formulate and promulgate the do’s and don’ts in both the material and spiritual domains while keeping in mind the elements and motives of “rational life” in society. History shows that the rulers can be divided into just and tyrannical rulers.

Obviously, the term hakim (ruler) is also laden with the concept of “command” (the term walī). These two terms are essentially not laden with despotism, egoism and self-centeredness, but rather depend on the person of the ruler, commander or guardian. We amply encounter the phrases “just or unjust governors and rulers” in Islamic resources. Of course, to align each of these phrases to those who deprive the people of their freewill and human dignity, degrade and debase them, is strongly rejected and condemned by the political wisdom of Islam.

p: 280

because it strongly opposes it. Hukm and hukūmah, in whatever rational sense they are understood—must have the power to command people to follow them— cannot be called mere knowledge of the ways and means of statecraft. It is important to clarify the confusion surrounding the concepts of Hukm and hukūmah to prove that benefiting from sublime human character and the universal religion of God is essential, and this is impossible with the “removal of religion from mundane life” approach.

Can political philosophy only be sought by tracing it to Ancient Greece and then in the centuries after the Renaissance?

Definitely, Islamic civilization would have been impossible without rational and practical political philosophy. So, it is necessary for the analysts of political philosophy to refrain from this baseless short cut (the political philosophy of Greece and Rome to the political philosophy of the recent periods), and also to investigate the political philosophy of Islam. This error has also been committed by most historians of philosophy and analysts in the history of science. As we can observe, with regards to the history of science and philosophy, these thinkers suddenly jump from Greek science and philosophy and then deal with them in the period after the Renaissance! They overlook a considerable share of Islam in the said two branches of knowledge, and this myopic view undermines the credibility of their views on these very important subjects. They must know that the phrase “Dark Ages” for the Middle Ages is only applicable to the West and during the same centuries (particularly from the latter part of the second century up to the fifth century AH) science was flourishing in Muslim countries and some Eastern communities.

Both the ancient and modern systems of political philosophy, anchored in secularism, are incapable of solving political problems.

There are different views about the ancient and modern systems of political philosophy. Some authorities are of the opinion that the basic difference between the ancient and modern political mindsets is that the ancient political views took into account all human rights and privileges for the entire human society. In reality, the duty of the government establishment is to justify and implement this policy and not focus more on individual welfare, rights and freedom.

It is very difficult to exactly determine the difference between the political philosophy of the ancient world and the modern world. The intrinsic

p: 282

progress of people has a very long history, although its origin, quality and quantity are extemely diverse in human societies. According to Whitehead, the meritorious services rendered by the Hebrew prophets to freedom are very great. Can civilization ever be conceivable without the members of society having the sense of innate individual identity, honor and dignity? Whitehead identified slavery and liberty as the main difference between the ancient and modern political views. He says:

“Now, with respect to the political factions in the ancient world, nothing has yet been settled. Every problem, which Plato(1) discusses, is still alive today, yet there is a vast difference between ancient and modern political theories, for we differ from the ancients on the one premise on which they all agreed. (Slavery was the supposition of premised theorists then. Freedom is the presupposition of political theorists now.)

For both sets of thinkers, God has been a great resource: a lot of things, which won’t work on Earth, can be conceived as true in His sight. Ancients and Moderns, in respect to this question, face directly opposite directions.”(2)

In order to be certain about the nature of this difference in the ancient and modern political mindsets, one must closely study social relations of people and their cultural, class, economic, religious, and moral conditions. Without this research, our views will be nothing but mere guess and imagination. Keeping in mind the difference between the two infrastructures of political philosophy (ancient and modern) and the basic problems in each of them, the said viewpoint is worth examining and reconsidering. Moreover, one must also closely examine the quality and quantity of individual liberty in the political realm of ancient Greek society.

p: 283

p: 284

2. Natural-divine life: this means that initially the human beings strive to solve their problems by benefiting from nature and their fellow human beings by virtue of natural laws, and secondly, they organize their life according to the attainment of the lofty goal of life, which is entry into the Axis of Sublime Perfection. In this type of life, involvement of a divine factor becomes necessary in the sense that without such involvement, it is impossible to answer the six questions which can be deduced from this Qur’anic verse:

﴿إِنَّا لِلّهِ وَإِنَّ-ا إِلَیْهِ رَاجِعونَ﴾

“Indeed we belong to Allah, and to Him do we indeed return.”(1)

Similarly, without the involvement of a divine factor, which religion possesses, no rule or law can answer the fundamental questions of man pertaining to the four types of relationship. As the author of Hikmat wa Hukūmat says, “Government or system of statecraft, whatever advanced form it may assume, is a very primary concept and natural experiment…”(2)

This is like the system of life of ants and bees based upon their respective laws of instinct and natural peculiarities. The only difference is that the systems of human life are far more complex, extensive, elaborate, and intricate, because human beings have faculties and powers such as general perceptions, rational abstractions, thinking and intellection, constructive competitions, discovery, and creativity- anchored in ingenuity, and the like. No matter how systematic the abovementioned animals may be, their life is limited and beyond improvement, development and enhancement. Inspite of having all those faculties and potentials, if human life revolves around the axis of egoism and justifies its activity with the laws of sheer nature, without benefiting from the divine rays that transcend matter and materiality, it is essentially the same animalistic life we have mentioned earlier. In the same vein, politics and government can also be divine-natural, as in the case of the luminous path of the prophets (‘a).

3. Intellectualism: what we mean by this kind of life is the use of reason in all aspects of life. Nowadays, this kind of life is usually associated with the West, and many Westerners claim it. The basis of the logical soundness of this kind of life is that all affairs of human life, which include the theoretical

p: 286

and practical intellect, are brought to fruition. It seems that tracing all the affairs of life to the intellect has not yet been realized fully in any society and it can be said that such substantiation is impossible. For example, which conventional theoretical or practical intellect can afford to affirm the real value of justice, human dignity and rational freedom in the arena of “might is right” and “survival of the fittest”?! All societies that claim to be following the rational approach in the sociopolitical domain of life consider themselves original proponents of ideological realities.

We can observe the most illustrious example of this support in approximately 20 cases in the introductory paragraphs of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which contain the preliminary provisions and value-laden terms. The introductory paragraphs of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are as follows:

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

“Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief, and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

“Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

“Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

“Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, and in the equal rights of men and women, and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

“Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

“Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of

p: 287

the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

“Now, therefore, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive;

“by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms; and, by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves, and among the people of territories under their jurisdiction.”(1)

Most of these paragraphs have expressed support for the values of life. The value-laden terms and phrases used in the entire preamble and other provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are as follows:

“Man as an honorable being”, “inherent dignity of man”, “members of the human family”, “fraternity and equality”, “friendly relations”, “spirit of humanity”, “equal rights”, “freedom”, “peace”, “justice”, “the highest aspiration of the common people”, “reason and conscience”, “life”, “belief”, “faith of the United Nations”, “universal respect”, “sense of common understanding”, “barabarous acts”, “rebellion” “strive” “better standards of life”, and, “proper observance of moral imperatives”.(2)

In the said kind of life, government and politics (so-called “rational”), some universal propositions are assumed to be presuppositions on the basis of which life, government and politics function. That is, in order to prove the realness of their demands and activities, the people, and rulers, invoke those presuppositions, which might have inherent defects that cannot be remedied.

The best example of such presuppositions is democracy, which has been accepted as a fundamental principle by countries and their rulers and administrators, and is used to interpret and establish social, political, cultural, legal, economic, and similar propositions. As such, life, government and politics being “rational”, does not mean that all their issues can really be interpreted through the intellect’s indisputable principles and axiomatic rules.

p: 288

In a bid to prove this claim, it is sufficient to pay attention to the six leading issues, which, scientifically and rationally, exist under the outward levels of the democratic system.

در ﻣﻴان نامها

لفظ ها و نامها چون دام هاست لفظ ﺷﻴرﻳن رﻳﮓ آب عمر ماست

The road is smooth, and under it are pitfalls: amidst the names there is a dearth of meaning.

Words and names are like pitfalls: the sweet (flattering) word is the sand for (the sand that sucks up) the water of our life.(1)

It is appropriate to open before your eyes an index of the deplorable plight of mankind in contrast to the sweet, beautiful and charming words:

O freedom, O anti-chains, O the best means of giving breathing space to man, what burdensome chains have been tied to human feet in your name!

O justice, what acts of oppression and tyranny have been committed in your sacred name and kept human society disunited, and far from harmonizing its way of life with your principles!

O right, O the beginning, the origin and the conclusion of the universe, how many falsehoods have they embellished with your name, and how they have deprived you of humanity!

This is the perpetual state of affairs of the weak. The egoist power holders have, through charming slogans and words, silenced them and changed their lives into a lifeless movement.

تو به نام حق فرﻳبی مر مرا تا کنی رسوای شور و شر مرا

نام حقم بست، نی آن رای تو نام حق را دام کردی، وای تو

ام حق بستاند از تو داد من من به نام حق سپردم جان و تن

ﻳا به زخم من رگ جانت برد ﻳا تو را چون من به زندانت بَرَد

Thou beguilest me with the Name of God in order that thou mayst expose me to shame and confusion.

The Name of God enthralled me, not thy contrivance: thou madest the Name of God a trap: woe to thee!

The Name of God will take vengeance from thee on my behalf: I commit my soul and body to the Name of God.

p: 290

Either it will sever the vein of thy life by my stroke, or it will bring thee into a prison as (it has brought) me.(1)

5. Like law and culture, if we classify politics into two important types (advanced and adherent), the democratic system will classify as “adherent”, and not “advanced”. In order to elucidate this point, it is necessary to give a brief definition of what constitutes “adherent” and “advanced”.

In the cases above (law, culture, politics, and the like), “adherent” means that there is no principle beyond the conventional natural life for man’s spiritual growth and advancement. “Advanced” means that one must follow a certain set of sublime principles because without doing so, it is impossible to achieve any spiritual growth and progress. “Advanced law,” means that it is the human beings themselves who identify what is good and bad for life, accept certain propositions as legal provisions, and act upon them in the domain of their lives. No person or power has the right to determine the legal rights of the members of society. “Advanced law” is that part of the principles which ensures the progress and perfection of man’s identity as well as organizes his natural life.

It is clear that no legal, moral, cultural, political, or economic system can be purely “adherent” or “advanced” because the rational, conscientious and empirical perception of the human beings plays a very vital role in identifying and practically addressing the concerns of their lives. For this reason, the religion of Islam has set the human intellect, heart (spirit) and experience as proof, and indispensable in identifying the objects of concern, except in very few instances. It follows that as far as the subjects, phenomena and addressing the genuine needs of human life are concerned, Islam has an “adherent” dimension—whether it is in realm of law, morality, politics, or economics.

Law, ethics, culture, and politics that can set the goal-oriented life of man in the Axis of Absolute Perfection and provide the answer to his six fundamental questions, must definitely follow a set of “advanced” principles in dealing with the four types of relationship. For example, acquiring a sublime character, keeping in constant contact with God, the Glorious, and responsibly exploiting the bounties of the earth in which he lives. If we look

p: 291

at politics only within the prism of the democratic system then democracy means that the people are free in whatever they think, whatever they want and whatever means they use to achieve an end except in cases where it arbitrarily affects the life of other members of society. This is the same “adherent politics” which imprisons humanity in the age of the cave-dwellers though it may have been adopted the world over. By following “adherent politics,” man cannot take a step beyond the reach of selfishness, whereas, his goals for perfection are definitively divine and metaphysical.

6. Evolutionary movements and transformations in history, have been initiated by a few individuals or an insignifant minority (quantitatively speaking). If these approaches and movements were entrusted to the skills and inclinations of the majority, humanity could not have taken a single step forward. There is no instance at all in which the majority of people, in a primitive society, directly rose up and made some discoveries and inventions, or delivered society from ignorance and misery, thereby, bringing the elements of progress into existence.

7. The following is a passage about democracy from a Platoist:

“The more Plato would think about this matter—this folly which is called ‘democracy’—the more he would be astounded. It is the democratic system, which relies on the carnal desires and inclinations of the public in electing political leaders. The reason behind Plato’s astonishment is that in trivial issues such as addressing our need for a pair of shoes we do not rely on anybody except a skilled shoemaker. Yet, how can we accept anyone who has many voices (or many voices support him) to rule? When we get sick, we want a proficient doctor who is highly skilled in medicine, and “not a good-looking and eloquent doctor”.(1)

That politics is a specific field, which requires certain expertise, is not inconsistent at all with the need to harmonize politics and government with man’s divine dimension.

In proving that statesmanship is a special art, there is a very good parable reported from Plato. He says:

“Statesmanship is the art of weaving. One must witness how a skilled

p: 292

weaver would initially turn wool into thread, and then how he would twist threads together in a particular scheme and way. Afterward, he would hand them over to his weaving factory and finally he would bring out from that factory a beautiful textile which could be used as man’s garment… The art of statesmanship is similar to the craft of weaving, as it can unite groups of free and separate individuals, organize them and build their harmonious relationship with such accuracy and dexterity that they become an elegant and decorated piece of cloth covering the whole country.”(1)

Then, in explaining and affirming the statements of Plato, the author of Hikmat wa Hukūmat thus says:

“From this philosophical parable of Plato, like the earlier account of Aristotle, the point becomes clear that the art of statesmanship, like handcraftship, is a practical skill. In terms of its direct connection with the needs of individuals and citizens and the daily happenings in the country and its relations with other countries, near and far, is like a garment, which must have cohesion, harmony and unison. A statesman must know the universal moral precepts and theoretical pure sciences, acquire inward traits and excellences, such as wisdom (practical wisdom), bravery and modesty, which can be summed up in justice. Then, he must practically and sagaciously have extensive knowledge of the actual particular matters and changing realities about his country, preserve harmonious relations among the citizens and maintain a friendly neighborhood with other countries, so that he can discharge this practical responsibility satisfactorily. The basic element of statesmanship is reflecting on the rational and religious tenets, principles and rules which are not consistent with theoretical reason. His main responsibility is to identify the internal and external issues of the country and its changing geopolitical realities, which are generally outside the realm of higher rational thinking or theoretical reason. However, since practical reason always connects knowledge and action, the intelligible and the tangible, the general points of theoretical reason with the particular and minor points of practical reason, the statesman must also know his ideals from the philosophers and moral thinkers. The moral ideals must be perfectly compatible

p: 293

with the actual particular concerns and issues of the country.”(1)

In view of the words of the said author, there are some important issues to examine: In the above pertinent passage, Plato has presented a dimension of the statesman’s actual functions in a very elegant parable.

The said dimension refers to the physical appearance of a society, which a professional statesman has brought into being through his political skill. Thus, this parable by Plato does not describe and elaborate all his beliefs on the nature of politics, the salient features of a statesman, and the purpose behind political activities, which is to prepare the people for the attainment of the sublime goal of their lives.

Second Issue: This parable does not reflect all the beliefs of Plato on government and politics.

That Plato likens statesmanship to good weaving, which must have cohesion, unity and unison for the people, does not reflects all of his ideas. It is certain that the statesman must not interfere in the inner, spiritual and ideological state of affairs that the citizens have or must have. If the statesmen of a country do not know who the individuals that they have woven, cut and sewn are and how they can be, are actually painting on the roof of a room which either does not exist or is not suitable for that painting.

But we know that the totality of Plato’s ideas on politics and government are acceptable to the divine religion. The righteous men of wisdom, who regard the blossoming of all dimensions—material and spiritual—of man as necessary, base their ideas on these very principles, and we shall touch on this point below.

Third Issue: Keeping in mind the totality of Plato’s ideas about politics and government as well as the education of the members of society, one cannot say that this great personality, like Aristotle, is among those who agree with secularist ideas.

Since the ideas of Plato about government and politics are among the most important views on politics utilized by most political philosophers, both in the past and in the present, it is necessary to make a summary of his ideas in this discourse.

Jules Barthélemy-Saint-Hilaire,(2) who was among the most authoritative

p: 294

philosophers in understanding and interpreting the ideas and beliefs of Aristotle and Plato in the West, has mentioned the fundamental elements and pillars of Plato’s political philosophy in the following manner:

“It must be noted that the reason behind giving an elaborate account of the fundamental elements of Plato’s political philosophy is that every political philosophy scholar justifies Plato’s views due to its immense importance in validating his own opinion. Yet, it is not sufficient to separate the children from that which may undermine their innocence. In the same manner, it is not sufficient to mold the children’s intellects with the light of cogent knowledge and make virtue acceptable to them by means of advice, admonition, and giving parables. Instead, beyond that, the principles of religion which nature has ingrained in their hearts must flourish within. Those principles of religion from which firm beliefs spring are principles, which connect man to God—the God who is the First, the Middle and the End-point of everything.(1) It is God, who is the Real Criterion of justice for the people He has created, and belief in His existence is the foundation of all laws. These are the essential beliefs, which must be the standard of educational training of the children. These are the same transcendent rules, which must be inculcated into the minds of the citizens by the legislator, if ever he is a man of wisdom. These beliefs are simple inasmuch as they are useful. These beliefs can be identified with three basic propositions: God, His supervision of the universe, and His justice, which is immune from giving favor to any party. Without these beliefs, man will get lost in the midst of the waves of incidents in this world. That person denies himself as long as he does not know where he comes from and what the sacred ideal is which his self must willingly follow and rely on. As for justice—so long as this rule is not the focus—there is no fixed rule, because justice, which is the one that gives life to the state and its government cannot be implemented except by God, in whose Eternal Essence justice is integrated. It is appropriate, therefore, for us to take action many years before the beginning of upbringing and training, to instill these sacred beliefs into the minds of the

p: 295

children. In fact, the law itself must not be lax in bringing to fruition those beliefs by means of being contented, but focus on those who forget those beliefs due to their inner weakness or moral corruption.

Any upringing or mode of training, which is not religious is defective and invalid. Any state whose citizens do not pay attention to these very important issues is on the verge of destruction. It is not correct to say that statesmen, who are unaware, imagine that they have to utilize religion sometimes for their rule. This is not so, because religion is needed for the identity of societies and states—in fact, it is above common needs. The need for religion is more than its function of organizing life. Of course, by having both essential and utilitarian dimensions [of religion], it can also be effected in organizing and ensuring the welfare of society. In various forms of human intellection, religion is the interpreter of pure nature and the most profound agent expressing realities. Man treats as holy all divine truths (such as the prophets and the saints (awliya’)), as they honor pious fathers as blessed sources of all good, particularly of virtue and sound reason.

The state, as perceived by Aristotle, is constituted by people who are equal and free. The people collectively benefit from their own works, understanding and awareness, and all of them nurture the divine seeds ingrained in them. By virtue of the pact of brotherhood, they are related to one another and for the preservation of their country’s government, they obey their illustrious leaders, who are tactful and prudent. These are the leaders, elected by the people to rule over them. These are the leaders, who have developed and undergone their training for virtues and all the sciences related to the discharge of their functions. They entrust their noble lives to the sacred creatures of God.

There is no need for the state, which is formed for the maintenance of internal harmony to constantly express its desire for harmony to its neighboring states. It must always be ready to face the aggression of any other state, and through regular rigorous training, its defenders must constantly resist the enemies, regardless of their number. Peace, not war must be the sole motive behind its patriotism and various military trainings and preparations, as done by famous communities and nations in history.

It should refrain from aggression against others just as it cannot withstand any internal revolution or violent movement. As the peaceful, prudent state decides to refrain from oppressing others, it shares half of the goal of other states in arming themselves; that is, given the presence of justice in applying

p: 296

force and enjoining virtues, it has no motive other than defense when attacking tyrannical enemies.”(1)

After stating in a relatively elaborate manner the basic elements of Plato’s political philosophy, Barthélemy-Saint-Hilaire thus said:

“These are the basic elements of Aristotle’s politics. Is this philosophy not full of truth, greatness and ample benefit? Is there anything obsolete in this upright and prudent state policy? Is this policy something delusional? Can it be said that this policy cannot be applied except to Greece where Plato lived? They are the same noble truths that have immortalized his political ideas. It is the same truths that have made this philosopher the validator of the philosophers’ and statesmen’s ideas. In most cases, people call this philosophy “Platonic Dreams” and sometimes, some intellectual scholars even reject this label, making a mockery of it. These sensible objections and allegation against “dreams” cannot be regarded as a criticism of this philosopher who pioneered these ideas and conveyed them to mankind. Instead, this “criticism” aptly clarifies the point that justice, reason and virtue are empty rhetoric for people and that these allegations and derisions against Plato’s sociopolitical beliefs are tantamount to the denial of innate human nature, history and society.”(2)

The concluding statement highlights the most devastating tragedy in human history, and that is, the lack of importance given by people in various societies to justice, reason and virtue, and even regarding them as empty rhetoric. Of course, the esteemed translator should add “common” to “people” because to believe that the common people do not give importance to the three concepts, regarding them as empty rhetoric, is a sort of error in judgment. To state that, “these allegations and derisions against Plato’s sociopolitical beliefs are tantamount to the denial of innate human nature, history and society” is a most vital and constructive outcry any person has ever expressed to his fellow human beings.

Fourth Issue: The author says, “The basic element of statesmanship is reflection on the rational and religious tenets, principles and rules which are not consistent with theoretical reason. In fact, the main responsibility of the statesman is to identify and know the internal and external issues and affairs

p: 297

of the country and its changing geopolitical realities which are generally outside the realm of higher rational thinking or theoretical reason.”

In this regard, this question comes to the fore: Can people be persuaded to lead a “rational life” even without necessary and sufficient familiarity with the rational and religious tenets, principles and rules as well as belief in the most important and essential of them? This is because the statesman does not tell anything about the causes of anything that previously transpired in society, is currently happening, or may possibly happen in the future. Instead, by discerning or perceiving them, he would choose, issue judgment and, in a sense, bid and forbid. Can an intelligent, just and wise statesman find out the best of goals amidst a plethora of events in various periods, choose the ways and means suitable for the said goals, and promulgate the appropriate laws for the people, without knowing the rational and religious tenets, principles and rules (at least within the country under his jurisdiction)?

In view of the necessity to persuade human beings to lead a “rational life” and to prepare them for the achievement of the sublime goal of the said life, the existence of a lofty spiritual station, alongside professional political activity, is indispensable.

Statesmen should sincerely coordinate with the spiritual station at all times in all societies, leading the society toward the best of goals. This harmony does not imply that the statesman and the holder of a spiritual station have to divide and partition man into two dimensions (physical and spiritual) and each of them take charge of one dimension. It means that the two dimensions of a single reality, which is the “rational life” of man, shall be managed by the spiritual and political stations without any contradiction and incompatibility. The psychologist and the physician takes charge of one dimension of man although the importance of psychotheraphy, as far their respective areas are concerned, is greater than that of medical science, which is concerned with man’s physical health, whereas, the former is concerned with the soul, mind, self, personality, and identity. These two groups cannot divide the human being into two parts and say, “I have nothing to do with the physical dimension of man” or, “I have no business with his soul, mind, personality, and identity.” Don’t you think that man’s exit from the scene of real life and entrance into the barren plains of egoism, self-centeredness, illusions, coining of terms, and finally nihilism is the result of such fragmentation of the human personality? Unfortunately, it is.

p: 298

p: 300

soul may become aware of itself (1)

2. Philosophy signifies knowledge of the foundations of the universe and readiness to answer the questions about the variables in the universe; that is, variables which science assumes the responsibility of knowing. Putting this knowledge into action along the path of “searching” for perfection also means wisdom, whose concerns are realities and not conventional concepts, which are based upon understanding and reason.

3. Science consists of discovering realities through observation, experiment and inward perception, or intuition. It is clear that because of the relativity of discovering realities, scientific relation with them is also relative.

It is clear that without religion, science and philosophy, movement along the path of “rational life” will be impossible.