Choice and Comprehension

These are the thoughts, and questions, that perhaps a philosophy major -- grounded in Western ideas but not as thoroughly in Islamic ones -- would ask. Throughout the Islamic world, much has been made of renewal (tajdeed) and reform (islah), predicated upon a revivification of Islamic law (shar'iah).

But more recently, I have come to question the scope of such a quest and whether or not it is somewhat misguided.

By questioning Islamic law as a project, however, do not believe I advocate a "salad-bowl" religion or the creation of a religion intent only on blind imitation (commonly referred to as "taqleed"). I do believe that, even from the perspective of the Qur'an alone (ignoring for the time being Hadith literature), certain behaviors are licit and certain others are illicit. Yet the more I search for a firm basis upon which to ground these injunctions, the more elusive it seems. What I find instead is that there is another aspect to the very idea of Islam -- submission -- itself, an idea of inevitability, lacking in the fierce optimism that characterizes some presentations of Islam, especially in the West.

We often view Islam as a religion preaching free will (How often do we hear: "La ikraha fi al-deen," there is no compulsion in religion? [2 256]). Yet I am coming to the view that what we ignore is that the religion of Islam offers free choice in only the most fleeting manner. Faith is a mystery, when we look into it. Law is rationalization of the supra-rational, when we consider it. Reality, from the Islamic point of view, really exists at many levels of comprehension, the more thorough of which must (in my view) admit to the possibility that there is no meaningful choice. At least, none that Islam can (or perhaps even should) provide.

From the Islamic point of view, practicing submission is the only reasonable choice before a person. We are able to accept the divinity of the Qur'an through various investigative techniques, but upon accepting its divinity, we are made to understand that divinity itself is incomprehensible. Not to say that it borders nothingness, as is often the Jewish conception, but that though it is a very real presence in our lives, for improving us or punishing us, the Divine is nonetheless beyond human logic. Once making the choice to live Islam, we can use our intellects to advance understandings of Islam, of its injunctions, but we cannot apply our intellects upon Islam itself, as a faith from God, nor can we apply our intellects to see whether or not we have made a free choice.

Any choice the human being has, in regards to her behavior in this life, is made on the basis of a variety of unjustifiable (that is not to say illegitimate) factors. Further, that choice is constrained, pinched in by what we are told, such that we might view Islam in this light: Either the person accepts submission, voluntary submits and goes to heaven, or the person rejects submission, is forcefully submitted anyway, and then goes to hell.

This is a rather contentious issue, but I have been impressed by this website's concise thinking, respectfulness, consideration of new opinions, doubts and the like, from within a framework of sincerity and hoped-for authoritativeness. In that regard, I pose the following questions (I am more and more inclined to dislike rigid answers, especially because of my ignorance regarding Islam):

1. Is there really a meaningful conception of "Free Choice" in Islam? It seems possible, and indeed likely, that the idea of life after death and the potential for eternal punishment, seriously and irredemiably contaminates the meaningfulness of choice. For example, were a leader to say, "either you accept me and I give you great wealth, or you deny me and I punish you severely" -- acceptance or denial could not said to be based upon a fair choice. Indeed, perhaps we have so internalized these consequences that we may never know if what we do is out of fear or out of conviction or some mix of the two.

Note, I am not saying that God is not deserving of submission, or that the choice he offers is unfair (quite the contrary, I think), but nonetheless, that free choice itself is a questionable proposal.

2. What is the reach of religious law? Recently, George Will, in regards to America's "war on terrorism," remarked: "We cannot defend what we cannot define." If we cannot define why God created humans, or if even humans have any meaningful choice, then to what extent can our reason, in application to a divine text and supporting texts, produce meaningful law? Yet we are told that the application of Islamic law to society will improve that society (because it is from God). Yet, in this situation, we are forced into something of a dilemma. There will always be a bias towards applying the law, from God, and more than that, there will always be -- and necessarily must be -- a degree of blind obedience.

The ramifications of such questions appear especially relevant to me:

Perhaps the earlier scholars of Islam were so emphatic in arguing that knowledge determines, or enhances, faith, in part because they could not conceive of an alternative system of thought, behavior and culture that could so challenge Islam. As is the case today. This is not to say that knowledge does not enhnace or strengthen one's faith, but rather, I feel my questions point to a certain arbitrariness in faith, an element of mystery which to me appears altogether more Christian (or, perhaps, Sufi?) than the rigidities of orthodox, legal thought in Islam.

Comments

[david]

I read this exact same speech from a christian scholar, submission vs free will. This is a dilema that has been facing christian believers for centuries.

How similar are your words and some will defend them so vehemently.

[heretic]

"We are able to accept the divinity of the Qur'an through various investigative techniques, but upon accepting its divinity, we are made to understand that divinity itself is incomprehensible."

How can you call the Qur'an DIVINE? Is that not committing shirk? Last time I checked, it was Hazrat Usman that put together a committee that "fomralized" the text - and then elimanated all other variants. Muslims mistake God's word as compiled by Man as divine and this is wrong.

[Thebit]

Actually, the traditional narrative of Uthman compiling the Qur'an flies in the face of the wider history and social background of the time.

[Muhammad Waqar Saleem]

Assalam U Alaikum Haroon and everyone,

Here are my two cents on these questions:

1- Any person standing on the cross roads of the "Right Rd" and the "Wrong Rd" has a free choice. No one is going to stop him no matter what he decides. After all, this is the very basic belief in Islam. We were given this life to test the very choices we make. Just a personal advice to all Muslims: once you starting treading the path of Islam, don't induldge too much into questions related with 'Taqdeer'. You will get derailed.

2- I think that the boundaries of religious law encompass each and every aspect of human life. However, there are some issues in which a human being is only answerable to God, such as those which are very personal. However, the issues that concern with one's public life have to be dealt with in legal institutions, such as courts.

[Zakir]

Assalammu Allaikkum Harron, Thebit and everyone,

I find Haroon's questions logical and thought provoking. These are the same question that goes into the mind of every deep thinking Muslim. In the mainstream Islam, you do not hear anybody talking about these topics, since most of them may not have a clue to these answers.

In posing these questions, I believe probably Haroon is finding it hard to come to terms with the idea that Allah created the Men and Jinn just to supplicate to him, as does everything else in this universe. In many a place in the Quran Allah SWT mentions that the human being is the best of creations but due to the greed in them they become the lowest of the worst creatures. Also by not willing to consider the Hadith you would not get answers to your questions..The Prophet's SAW Seerah will give answers, he was the "living Quran"

The other texts would be by the old scholars, the one that pops into nearly every serious thinker’s mind is Imam Ghazali. The question reminds me of ALI (RA) saying where he classifies believers to be of three types..

1. - People who pray in fear of hell
2. Traders - people who pray to achieve paradise
3. - People who just pray to attain nearnes to Allah (SWT), they do not care about Hell or Heaven...

My own thinking is that if we are trying to see through the kaliedescope of Western logic we will never find a solution to all the questions. You would have to learn to do the right things for the door of wisdom to be opened by His Graciousness...the knowledge achieved thereby (the fountain from the SOURCE of everything) would give you solace without doubts..until then we have no choice but seek the right person(S) to guide us.

Everytime I get a negative nag, I get to think that if Islam is Allah's way why should the Prophet (SAW) have struggled so hard to spread the right religion, How was He as a person able to achieve that? If we can get so easily bogged done by these thoughts to follow the right path....what would you have done if we were among the early companions would we have followed or not? I would not agree with Thebit’s answer that we should not explore…my choice would be to explore with conviction that Islam is the right, but what you may see, hear or understand may be wrong..so start searching again…

May Allah SWT forgive if I have mentioned anything wrong…..

Zakir