خرید و دانلود فایل پاورپوینت کامل The viewpoint of the Qur`an on guidance and misguidance

بخشی از متن فایل پاورپوینت کامل The viewpoint of the Qur`an on guidance and misguidance :

Al-Baqarah,
(The Cow)
Chapter 2, Verses 26-27

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لا یَسْتَحْیِی أَنْ یَضْرِبَ مَثَلاً ما بَعُوضَهً فَما فَوْقَها فَأَمَّا الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا فَیَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّهُ الْحَقُّ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ وَ أَمَّا الَّذِینَ کَفَرُوا فَیَقُولُونَ ما ذا أَرادَ اللَّهُ بِهذا مَثَلاً یُضِلُّ بِهِ کَثِیراً وَ یَهْدِی بِهِ کَثِیراً وَ ما یُضِلُّ بِهِ إِلاَّ الْفاسِقِینَ (۲۶) الَّذِینَ یَنْقُضُونَ عَهْدَ اللَّهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ مِیثاقِهِ وَ یَقْطَعُونَ ما أَمَرَ اللَّهُ بِهِ أَنْ یُوصَلَ وَ یُفْسِدُونَ فِی الْأَرْضِ أُولئِکَ هُمُ الْخاسِرُونَ (۲۷)

Surely Allàh is not ashamed to set forth any parable (that of) a gnat or any thing above that; then as for those who believe, they know that it is the truth from their Lord, and as for those who disbelieve, they say: “What is it that Allàh means by this parable” He causes many to err by it and many He leads aright by it, but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors (26), who break the covenant of Allàh after its confirmation and cut asunder what Allàh has ordered to be joined, and make mischief in the land; these it is that are the losers (27).
COMMENTARY
QUR’AN: Surely Allàh is not ashamed . . .:
Gnat or mosquito is one of the smallest animals perceptible by naked eyes. These two verses run parallel to verses 19 – 21 of ch. 13: Is then he who knows that what has been sent down to you from your Lord is the truth like unto him who is blind Only those possessed of understanding shall bear in mind, those who fulfil the promise of Allàh and do not break the covenant, and those who join that which Allàh has bidden to be joined, and fear Allàh and fear the evil reckoning.
The verse clearly shows that there is a straying, a blindness, which afflicts the man as a result of his evil deeds; it is different from that initial straying and blindness which the man opts for by his own free will. Look at the sentence, “but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors”. They transgressed first, and it was only then that Allàh made them go astray.
Guidance and misguidance are two comprehensive words; they encompass every felicity and infelicity that comes from Allàh to His good and wicked servants respectively. As Allàh describes in the Qur’àn, He makes His good servants live a happy life, strengthens them with the spirit of faith, bring them out of the darkness into the light, and gives them a light by which they walk among the people; He has taken them under His protection and guardianship, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve, He is with them, answers them when they call on Him, and remembers them when they remember Him; and the angels come down to them with good news of eternal peace.
Diametrically opposed to it is the condition of evil-doers. Allàh causes them to err, takes them out of the light into the darkness, sets a seal upon their hearts and hearings, and a covering over their eyes He alters their faces turning them on their backs; places chains on their necks and these reach up to their chins, so they have their heads raised aloft, and makes a barrier before them and a barrier behind them, then He covers them over so that they cannot see; He appoints for them the Satans to become their associates, and they turn them away from the right path while they think that they are guided aright; those Satans make their misdeeds to seem good to them and they are their guardians; Allàh leads them on by steps from whence they perceive not; and yet He respites them, but His plan is firm; He makes a plan for them and leaves them alone in their rebellion, blindly wandering on.
These are some examples of the conditions of the two groups. On deeper consideration, it appears that man, in this world, lives two lives: there is this life which may be seen and perceived by all, and there is another life hidden behind this one; that hidden life is either good or bad – depending on his faith and deeds. Man will become aware of that hidden life when the veil of secrecy will be removed after death. Then he will see himself in his true form.
Further, it appears from the Qur’ànic verses that man has had a spiritual life before the life of this world; and he shall have another life after this one. In other words, man has been given three lives – this life in this world is the second one, there was one preceding it and there will be another following. The condition of the third life shall be determined by that of this second life – which, in its turn, is governed by the first one.
Many exegetes have explained away the verses about the first life; they say that it is only a literary style, which presents imaginary pictures as real facts. And as for the verses concerning the life hereafter, they too are misrepresented as allegories and metaphors. But both types of verses are too clear in this meaning to allow such misinterpretations.
We shall explain the verses about the first life under ch. 7. As for the life hereafter, many verses show that the same good or bad deeds which man commits in this life, shall be returned to him, as their own reward or punishment, on the day of requital. Allàh has mentioned this fact in many verses: . . . and do not make excuses today; You shall be recompensed only what you did (66:7); then every soul shall be paid back in full what it has earned, and they shall not be dealt with unjustly (2:281); then be on guard against the fire of which men and stones are fuel (2:24); Then let him summon his council We too would summon the tormentors (of the hell) (96:17-18); On the day that every soul shall find present what it has done of good and what it has done of evil . . . (3:30); they eat nothing but fire into their bellies . . . (2 A74); . . . surely they only swallow fire into their bellies . . . (4:10). There are many verses of the same import.
Then there is the verse 50:22, which by itself is enough to convince one of this principle: Certainly you were heedless, Of it, but now We have removed from you your veil, so your sight today is sharp. The words, “you were heedless of it”, indicate that there was something present in this world, to which the guilty one has not paid any attention; “removed from you your veil” means that, but for that veil, he could have seen that reality even in-this worldly life. What the man would see on the Day of Resurrection was present even in this earthly life; otherwise, it would not be logical to say that previously you were inattentive to it, or that it was hidden from your eyes, but now that the cover has been removed, you may see it clearly.
There is no allegory or metaphor in these verses. Try to explain in plain Arabic the principle which we have mentioned just now. You will not find a more explicit way than the one used in these verses. Then, how can they be explained away as allegories
The divine talk here points at two realities:
First: Recompense: What a man will get in hereafter -reward or punishment, paradise or hell – shall be in recompense of the good or evil he would have done in this life.
Second: Embodiment of the deeds: Many verses indicate that the good or evil deeds themselves turn into their own pleasant or unpleasant recompense. (Or, that the recompense is an inseparable concomitant of the deeds themselves.) It is hidden from our eyes in this life, but we shall see it clearly on the day of reckoning.
These realities are not really two. But we had to explain it in this way to bring it nearer to the minds. The QurӉn too says that it uses similitudes to make people understand.

QUR’AN: but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors:
“al -Fisq”( الفسق = transgression, sinfulness). It is the Qur”ân that, first of all, used this word in its now prevalent meaning. It is derived from fasaqati “t-tamrah فسقت التمره) = the date broke out of its outer rind). That is why it has been further explained by the words, “who break the covenant of Allâh after its confiirrnation” – a thing must be whole before it is broken. Also the transgressors are described at the end of the verse as the losers – one must be owning a thing before he can lose it. Allâh further says: Surely the losers are they who have lost themselves and their people on the resurrection day (42:45). All these expressions show how appropriate the adjective, “al-fasiqin”(الفاسقین = the transgressors) is in this context. You should never think that the adjectives used by Allâh in His book for His good servants (like “those who are near to Allâh”, “the sincere ones”, “the humble ones”, “the good ones”, “the purified ones” etc.) or for the evil ones (like “the unjust”, “the transgressors”, “the losers”, “those who go astray”, etc.) are cheap epithets, or that they ausas literary embellishment. Each adjective has its own significance; each points to a particular stage in man”s spiritual journey. Each has its own characteristics, and gives rise- to its especial effects and consequences. On physical level, every age has its own characteristics and powers, which cannot be found before or after that age; likewise, on spiritual plane, every attribute has its own special effects.

AN ESSAY ON COMPULSION AND DELEGATION
The sentence, “but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors”, explains how Allah manages the actions of His servants. Does He compel them to act in a pre-determined way Or, has He delegated to them all powers in this respect It is better to solve this knotty problem here and now, by the guidance of the Qur”an.
Allah says: Whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is Allah”s (2;284); His is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth (57 :5); to Him belongs the kingdom, and to Him is due (all) praise (64:1). These and other similar verses prove that to Allah belongs the whole universe; His ownership is unconditional and unlimited. A man owns a thing, let us say, a donkey; he may use it and take its advantage to a certain extent only. For example, he may ride it or use it as a beast of burden; but he cannot starve it to death, nor can he burn it alive. Why Because his ownership is not absolute; society would condemn him if he were to commit such atrocities. His ownership allows him certain advantages only; and not every possible use.
But when we say that Allah is the Owner of the worlds, we mean abs0olute, real and unrestricted ownership. There is no owner except Allah; the things own, or control, for themselves neither any harm nor any profit, neither life, death no resurrection. It is only Allah who owns and controls every affair of every creature; He may do with them whatever He pleases; no one can ask Him why; He cannot be blamed or questioned for anything He does, because He is the absolute Owner. He has, of course, allowed some of His creatures to use some other things to a certain limits; but both the user and the used are His property; and the user cannot exceed the authorized limit. Allah, as the absolute Owner, cannot be questioned about His dispositions; but others have to give account of how they exercised their authority. Allah says: who is he that can intercede with Him but by His permission (2 : 255) ; there is no intercessor except after His permission (10:3) ; . . . that if Allah please He would certainly guide all the people (13:31) ; And if Allah please He would certainly make you a single nation, but He causes to err whom He pleases and guides whom He pleases. . . (16:93); And you do not please except that Allah please (76:30) ; He cannot be questioned concerning what He does and they shall be questioned (21:23) . Allah disposes and manages His property in any way He pleases; no one can use any other thing except with His permission, because He is the real Owner and Sustainer of every thing.
Now we come to the rules and laws which Allah ordains for His creatures. He uses the same method which has been adopted by the human society – ordaining what is good and praising and rewarding its doers; forbidding what is bad and condemning and punishing its doers. For example, He says: If you give alms openly, it is well (2:271) , . . . evil is a bad name after faith (49 :11) . Obviously, the laws ordained by Allah look at the good of man, and aim at perfecting the human society. Allah says: . . . answer (the call of) Allah and His Apostle when he calls you to that which gives you life (8:24) ; that is better for you, if you know (61:11); Surely Allah enjoins the doing of justice and the doing of good (to others) and the giving to kindred, and He forbids indecency and evil and rebellion (16:90) ; Surely Allah does not enjoin indecency (7:28). There are many such verses; and they show that the principles which the laws are based upon are always the same – be it a divine commandment or a human legislation. What is good in itself and ensures the good of the society is allowed, enjoined and prescribed; and what is evil in itself and endangers the social structure is forbidden; man is praised and rewarded for doing the former, and blamed and punished for doing the later. Some of those principles are as follows:-
People do whatever they do because of its underlying wisdom and good. Legislation of laws is no exception to this rule; the laws too are made because of their underlying good and benefit. They reward the law-abiding citizens and chastise, if they so wish, the law-breakers. The said recompense must be correlated to the action done – in its quantity and quality. Also, it is accepted that the enjoinment and prohibition can be addressed to him only who is not under any duress or compulsion who has got freedom of will and choice. The above-mentioned recompense too is related to such actions only which emanate from free will and choice. Of course, if someone, by his own action, puts himself in a tight corner, in a difficult position where he has to transgress a law, he may be justly punished for that transgression, and his plea of helplessness will not be heeded at all.
Allah uses these same principles in His dealing with His creatures. He does not compel the man to obey or to disobey the divine commands. Had there been any compulsion, rewarding the obedient ones with the paradise and punishing the disobedient ones with the hell would have been absolutely wrong: the reward would have been an unprincipled venture, and the punishment an unmitigated oppression and injustice – and all of it is evil according to reason. Moreover, it would mean favouring one against the other without any justification, without any cause – and this too is a demerit according to reason. Furthermore, it would provide the aggrieved party with a valid argument against Allah; but Allah says: . . . so that people should not have an argument against Allah after the (coming of) apostles (4:165); . . . that he who would perish might perish by clear proof, and he who would live might live by clear proof (8:42).
The above discourse makes the following points clear:-
First: Divine laws are not based on compulsion. These rules have been made for the good of man in this life and the hereafter. And they have been prescribed for him because he has freedom of will, he may obey the rule if he so wishes, and may disobey if he so chooses. He will be fully recompensed for whatever good or bad he does by his free will.
Second: There are things and actions which are not in conformity with the divine sanctity, yet the Qur”an attributes them to Allah, like misleading, deceiving, scheming against someone, leaving him wandering on in his rebellion, letting the Satan overpower the man and become his associate. All these actions are related to various kinds of misleading and misguidance. But Allah is above all defects and demerits, and, therefore, these words when attributed to Him, should convey a meaning in keeping with His sacred name. Initial misleading, even in the sense of making inattentive and forgetful, cannot be ascribed to Allah. What the above-mentioned expressions actually mean is this: When someone by his own free will, opts to go astray, chooses the wrong path and commits sins, then Allah leaves him in that straying, and, thus, increases his error – it is done as a punishment of his wrong choice. Allah says: He causes many to err by it and many He leads aright, by it, but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors (2:26) . . . . when they turned aside, Allah made their hearts turn aside (61: 5) . Thus does Allah cause him to err who is extravagant, a doubter (40:34).
Third: The divine decree does not cover the actions of the man inasmuch as they are attributed to him – they are done by the doer, although not created by him. We shall further explain it later.
Fourth: Now that it has been seen that the divine law is not based on compulsion, it should be clearly understood that it is not based on delegation of power either. How can a “master” issue an authoritative command if he has delegated all his powers to the servant. In other words, this theory of delegation negates the comprehensive ownership of Allah vis-à-vis many of His possessions.

TRADITIONS
A great number of traditions (narrated from the Imams of Ahlul-bayt – a.s.) says: “There is neither compulsion nor delegation (of power), but (there is) a position between these two (extremes). “
It is reported in `Uyunu”1-akhbdr, through several chains: When the Leader of the faithful, “Ali ibn Abi Tahb (a. s.) returned from Siffin, an old man (who has participated in that battle) stood up and said: “O Leader of the faithful! Tell us about this journey of ours, was it by Allah”s decree and measure” The Leader of the faithful said: “Yes, O Shaykh! By Allah you did not ascend any elevation, nor did you descend to any valley but by a decree of Allah and by His measure.” The old man, thereupon said: “I leave to Allah all my troubles (of this journey), O Leader of the faithful!” (“Ali – a.s.) replied: “Have patience, O Shaykh! Perhaps you take it to mean a firm decree and a compulsory measure! If it were so, then there would be no justification of reward or punishment, no sense of command, prohibition or admonition, no meaning of promise or threat; there would not be any blame on an evil-doer nor any praise for a good-doer. Nay, the good-doer would have been rather more deserving of blame than the evil-doer, and the evil-doer rather more worthy of grace than the good-doer. (Beware!) this is the belief of the idol-worshippers and the enemies of the Beneficent God (who are) the Qadariyyah of this ummah and its Majus. O Shaykh ! Verily Allah ordained (the shari”ah) giving freedom of will (to men) and prohibited (evil) to keep us on guard; and He gave plentiful (reward) on meager (deeds); and He was not disobeyed by being overpowered, nor was He obeyed by compulsion; and He did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them in vain; that is the opinion of those who disbelieve on account of the fire.”

The author says: The topics of the speech of Allah and His decree and measure were among the earliest about which the Muslims differed among themselves. This second dispute may be described as follows:

The eternal divine will govern every thing in the universe. These things are transient in their quiddity; but when they do exist, they do so because the will of Allah decreed their existence – and in this way their existence becomes essential – otherwise, the divine decree would be meaningless. Conversely, when a thing does not exist, it is because Allah did not decree its existence and in this way its existence becomes impossible – otherwise, the divine will would be meaningless. In short, whatever exists, exists because Allah has decreed its existence,-thus turning it into an essential being. This principle applies everywhere. But the difficulty arises when it comes to such a human action that issues from our own will and choice. We know that we can do it if we so desire, and can ignore it if we so wish. Their doing and not doing is equally possible to us. The balance is tipped in favour of either side by our own will and choice. Our actions are based on our choice, and our will brings them into existence. The difficulty that arises at this point is this: We have earlier seen that nothing comes into being without the will and decree of Allah, which turns the thing into an essential being – if so, then how can any action of ours be termed as “possible” one It must exist because the divine will has decreed it! Moreover, how can our will affect it in any way when it is governed by the will of Allah Also, in this background, it cannot be said that man had power to do a certain work before he did it. And, because he did not have that power, Allah could not give him any order or command for or against that work. Going a step further, if Allah gave him an order and he did not comply, it would mean that Allah Himself had not wanted that thing to happen; so it was impossible for it to happen. Then the question would arise: How could Allah order him to perform an impossible task Conversely, if someone complied with that order, it was because Allah “Himself wanted it to happen. Then why should the man be rewarded without any valid reason By the same reasoning, a sinner should not be punished, as it would be against justice, a naked oppression. One may go on enumerating the difficulties arising out of this subject. A large number of Muslims felt obliged to admit, and believe in, all these absurdities. They said that:
Man does not have power to do a work before the time comes to do it. The reason has nothing to do with the merit or demerit of any action. Whatever Allah does becomes good; and whatever He forbids becomes evil.
Accordingly, Allah may choose an action without any justification; He may give reward without any cause; He may ordain laws beyond the capacity of the doer or agent; He may inflict punishment on a disobedient servant even though the said disobedience and transgression was not of his doing.
It appears that the old man, who had asked the question, thought that the belief in the divine will and decree meant that there was no merit or demerit in any action and that man had no right of any reward (or punishment). Naturally he was disappointed when he heard that the journey was by the decree of Allah; that is why he said: “I leave to Allah all my troubles.” What he meant was this: My journey to Siffin and back and my fighting in the way of Allah had no benefit for me as it was governed and done by the will of Allah; my share in all this venture was only the trouble and the inconvenience which I underwent. Therefore, I shall leave it to Allah to balance my account, as it was He Who put me through all these troubles. The Imam (`Ali) replied to him by saying, “If it were so, there would be no justification of reward or punishment. . .” The Imam pointed to the rational principle on which the legislation is based. And at the end he reasoned that Allah did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them in vain. If Allah could will the man”s actions in a way as to deprive him of his freedom of will and choice, it would mean that He could do things without any purpose and aim; then He could create the whole creation aimlessly and in vain. This in its turn would render the principle of resurrection and reward and punishment invalid too.
It is narrated in at-Tawhid and `Uyunu”1-akhbar that ar-Rida (a.s.) was asked about compulsion and delegation, and he said: “Should I not teach you in this regard a principle by which you shall never differ (among yourselves), and no one will argue with you on this subject but that you shall defeat him (by it)” We said: “(Teach it to us) if you so please.” Thereupon he said
“Verily Allah is not obeyed through compulsion, nor is He disobeyed by overpowering; and He did not leave the servants remiss in His kingdom; He (still) owns what He has given into their possession, and has power on what He has put into their power. Now, if the servants decided to obey Him, He would not prevent them from it, nor would he put any obstruction to it; and if they decided to disobey Him, then if He pleased to bar their way to it He would do so, and if He did not hinder it and they committed it, then it was not He Who led them into that (sin).” Then the Imam said: “Whoever would accurately delineate the boundaries of this speech would surely overcome his adversary.”

The author says: Why did “al-Mujabbirah” (” المجبره =the believers in compulsion) say what they said It was because they pondered on the divine decree and measure, and it led them to the conclusion that when Allah decrees a thing it must happen inescapably. Their deliberation of this subject was correct, and so was the conclusion arrived at. Where they fell in error was in correlating that conclusion with reality; they did not understand the difference between a reality and an idea based on subjective approach; they forgot the distinction between essentiality and possibility.

It is correct to say, on the basis of the divine decree and measure, that nothing happens in this world unless it turns an essential being; it is because every thing and every affair comes into being when it is decreed by Allah, according to the measure prescribed by Him; and then it cannot fail to happen, otherwise the decree of Allah would fail. At the same time, it should be kept in mind that a transient or possible thing becomes essential because of its sufficient cause. When looked at in conjunction with its sufficient cause, it would be called “essential”; but separated from that cause, it would remain as it was before – a transient or possible thing. Let us look at an action of man which he does by his free will and choice. When we look at it in relation to all things that are necessary to bring it into being – knowledge, will, proper tools and organs, the material, formal, efficient and final causes, and all the conditions of time and space – it will become an essential being; and it is in this context that it become subject of the eternal divine will. In other words, it becomes an essential being when all aspects of its sufficient cause are complete. But, looked in relation to each of those aspects separately, it remains only a transient and possible thing. If it is seen vis-à-vis its efficient cause only, that is, in relation to the doer only, it will retain its characteristics of transience and possibility – it will not become an essential being.
It is now clear to see at which point the believers in “compulsion” have deviated from the right path. They thought that, inasmuch as the human action was subject to the divine will and decree, man had no power on it; he was not a free agent; he was rather a helpless tool in divine hands. But they did not take into consideration the fact that the divine will takes it into hand only when all aspects of its sufficient cause are complete, and not before that. The divine will decrees that a certain action be done by Zayd – not unconditionally, but on the condition that it is done by Zayd”s free will, at a certain time and a certain place. Therefore, its relation to the divine will itself demands that it should be an action of a free agent, done by his own free will and choice.
Doubtlessly, that action will be called an “essential” one if seen in relation to the divine will; but at the same time and by virtue of the same divine will, it will be a possible and transient action when related to the doer, that is, the man. In other words, there are two wills – the human and the divine; they do not run parallel to each other; the divine will comes after and above the human will – they are in a vertical, and not a horizontal position to each other. Therefore, there is no competition or collision between the two wills. It was a short-sightedness on part of the believers in compulsion to negate the human will in order to establish the divine one.
The Mu”tazilites said that human actions are done by man”s free will. But they went to the other extreme, and fell in an error no less objectionable than that of al-Mujabbirah. They too said that if human action was subjected to the divine will man would not have any freedom of will and choice. And then they took a position diametrically opposed to that of al-Mujabbirah, and came to the conclusion that the divine will had no relation whatsoever to the human action. Thus they had to accept another creator – the man himself – for human actions. In this way, they accepted dualism without knowing what they were doing. Going further they fell into traps more harmful than the belief of al-Mujabbirah. As the Imam has said: “The poor al-Qadariyyah, they wanted to emphasize the justice of Allah, so they removed Him from His power and authority. . . “
A master, showing kindness to one of his slaves, married him to a slave-girl of his; he bestowed on him a property, gave him a well-furnished house and