The religious obligations

The object of all religious obligations is the acquisition of a habit firmly rooted in the soul, from which a necessary knowledge results for the soul.

It is the (recognition of the) oneness of God, which is the (principal) article of faith and the thing through which happiness is attained.

There is no difference whether the obligations of the heart or those of the body are concerned in this respect. This shows that faith, which is the basis and source of all the (religious) obligations, is of that type and has several degrees. The first degree is the affirmation by the heart of what the tongue says.

The highest degree is the acquisition, from the belief of the heart and the resulting actions, of a quality that has complete control over the heart.

It commands the actions of the limbs. Every activity takes place in submissiveness to it. Thus, all actions, eventually, become subservient to this affirmation by faith, and this is the highest degree of faith. It is perfect faith. The believer who has it will commit neither a great nor a small sin.

The acquisition of the firmly rooted habit (of faith) prevents even the briefest deviation from its ways. Thus, Muhammad says: “An adulterer does not commit adultery, if he commits adultery while he is a believer.”

Then, there is the tradition of Heraclius, who asked Abu Sufyan b. Harb about the Prophet and his position. He asked whether any of the men around Muhammad would become an apostate, out of displeasure with his religion, after he had become a Muslim.

The reply was: “No.”

Heraclius remarked: “The same applies to faith when its cheerfulness has penetrated the hearts.” 325 This means that it is as difficult for the soul to oppose the habit of faith, once it has been firmly established, as is the case with all other habits, once they have become firmly established. For they become a kind of natural disposition.

This is the highest degree of faith. It comes second after infallibility, because infallibility is a primary necessityof prophets, while this (degree of faith) comes to the believers secondarily, as a result of their actions and of their affirmation.

The (varying) firmness of this habit causes differences in faith, as is known from the statements of the early Muslims. Much of it can be found in the chapter headings of alBukhari’s chapter on faith. For instance= “Faith consists of words and actions”; “it may be more or less”; “prayer and fasting are part of faith”;

“supererogatory (prayer) in Ramadan is part of faith”; and “bashfulness is part of the faith.” 326 All these statements envisage perfect faith. We have referred to it and to how the habit of it can be attained. Perfect faith is something connected with action.

Affirmation, the first degree of perfect faith, admits of no differences (in intensity). Those who consider the first (meanings) of terms and thus think of (faith) as affirmation cannot show any differences (in the intensity of their affirmation), as the leading speculative theologians have stated. But those who consider the final (meanings) of terms and thus think of (faith) as the habit that is perfect faith, do show differences (in the intensity of their faith). This does not speak against the unity of the primary reality of (perfect faith), which is affirmation, since affirmation exists in all degrees of (faith). It is the lowest degree for which the term “faith” may be used. It absolves (the person who has it) from the responsibility of unbelief and is the distinguishing element between unbeliever and believer. Anything less would not be sufficient.

Thus, by definition, it is a reality that is uniform and admits of no differences. Differences appear only in the “state” that is the result of action, as we have stated.

Muhammad described to us this first degree of faith which is affirmation. He specified particular matters he charged us to affirm with our hearts and to believe in our souls, while at the same time acknowledging them with our tongues. They are the established articles of the Muslim faith. When Muhammad was asked about faith, he said= “(Faith is) the belief in God, His angels, His Scriptures, His messengers, the Last Day, and the belief in predestination, be it good or bad.” 327

These are articles of faith as established in the science of speculative theology. Let us describe them in summary fashion, so that the real character of speculative theology and the way in which it originated may become clear. We say:

Muhammad commanded us to believe in the Creator whom he considered as the sole source of all actions, 328 as wehave mentioned before.

He informed us that this belief means our salvation, if we have it when we die. However, he did not inform us about the real being of this worshiped Creator, because it is something too difficult for our perception and above our level.

He made it our first obligation to believe that He in His essence cannot be compared with created beings. Otherwise, it would not be correct that He was their creator, since in this way there would be no distinction (between Him and them).

Then, he (made it our obligation to believe that) He cannot be described in any way as deficient. Otherwise, He would be similar to created beings. Then, he (made it our obligation to believe in) His oneness as divine being. 329 Otherwise, the creation (of the world) could not have materialized, on account of mutual antagonism.330

Then, there are the following articles of faith:

God is knowing and powerful. In this way, (all) actions materialize as witness(es), by syllogism, 331 to the perfection of the act of creation. He has volition. Otherwise, no created thing would be differentiated from the other.

He determines the fate of each created thing. Otherwise, volition would be something that comes into being.

He causes our resurrection 332 after death. This constitutes the final touch to His concern with the first 333 creation. If (created things) were destined to disappear completely, 334 their creation would have been frivolous. They are destined for eternal existence after death. 335

Further, the articles of faith are= God sent (His) messengers in order to save (us) from trouble on the (Day of) Resurrection, because (that Day) may mean either trouble or happiness (for us), and we would not know about it. He wanted to complete His kindness toward us by informing us about this situation and explaining to us the two possibilities and that Paradise means bliss and Hell punishment.

These main articles of faith are proven by the logical evidence that exists for them. Evidence for them from Qur’an and Sunnah (also) is ample. The early Muslims derived them from that evidence. The scholars showed the way to them and the religious leaders verified them.

However, later on, there occurred differences of opinion concerning details of these articles of faith. Most of the differences concerned ambiguous 336 verses. This led to hostility and disputation. Logical argumentation was used in addition to the traditional (material). In this way, the science of speculative theology originated.

In many verses of the Qur’an, the worshiped Master is described as being absolutely devoid of human attributes in obvious terms requiring no interpretation. All those verses are negative (in their statements). They are clear on the subject. It is necessary to believe them. Statements of the Lawgiver (Muhammad) and the men around him and the men of the second generation have explained them in accordance with their plain meaning.

Then, there are a few other verses in the Qur’an suggesting anthropomorphism, with reference to either the essence or the attributes (of God). The early Muslims gave preference to the evidence for God’s freedom (from human attributes), because it was ample and clear. They knew that anthropomorphism is absurd.

They decided that (those) verses were the word of God, and, therefore, believed in them and did not try to investigate or interpret their meaning. This is what is meant by the statement made by most early Muslims= “Let them pass on as they have come.” 337 That is, believe that they are from God, and do not try to interpret or change them; they may be a temptation. It is, thus, necessary to stop 338 and submit to (God).

But there were a few innovators in their time who occupied themselves with the ambiguous verses and 339 delved into anthropomorphism. One group operated with the plain meaning of the relevant verses. They assumed anthropomorphism for God’s essence, in that they believed that He has hands, feet, and a face.

Thus, they adopted a clear anthropomorphism and were in opposition to the verses stating that God is devoid (of human attributes).

The idea of body entails deficiency and imperfection. It is more proper to give preference to the negative verses indicating that God is absolutely devoid (of human attributes), which are very numerous and clear, than to cling to the plain meaning of the (anthropomorphic) verses with which we can dispense, and to try to combine the two indications with the help of interpretation of (the anthropomorphic verses). The (people who gave consideration to the anthropomorphic verses) then tried to escape from the anthropomorphic abomination by stating that (God has) “a body unlike (ordinary human) bodies.” This is no defense for them, because it is astatement contradictory in itself and a combination of negation and assertion, if both (negation and assertion) are used here for one and the same concept of body. But if the two differ among themselves 340 and (thus) disavow the commonly accepted concept of body, those (people) rather agree with us that God is devoid (of human attributes). They consider the word “body” to be merely one of His names (used in a peculiar sense in connection with Him). Things like that depend on permission. 341 Another group turned to anthropomorphism with regard to the attributes of God. They assumed direction, sitting, 342 descending, voice, letter (sound), and similar things (for God). Their stated opinions imply anthropomorphism. Like the former group, they took refuge in statements such as= “A voice unlike voices”; “a direction unlike directions”; “descending unlike descending.” By that, they meant: “(not as those things are used) in connection with (human) bodies.” The refutation here is the same as in the former case.

The only thing that remains to be done with the plain (seemingly anthropomorphic) statements is (to follow) the beliefs and theories expressed by the early Muslims.

One must believe in the (statements) as they stand, so that it cannot happen that by disavowing their meaning, one disavows them as such, although they are a sound and established part of the Qur’an.

That is what is behind the statements found in the creed of the Risalah of Ibn Abi Zayd 343 and in his Mukhtasar and in the books of the hadith expert Ibn ‘Abd-al-Barr, 344 and others. They try to convey the idea mentioned. One should not close one’s eyes to the propositions in their discussion that prove it.