ORTHODOX Sunnite theology affirms that there is no need for man to consider the question of direct and constant ‘communication’ between man and Allah. As we discovered when considering the Islamic doctrine of revelation, Islam holds that the prophets receive the writings which Allah has from eternity decreed for them and their age or people. These writings constitute their link with Allah and they are required to direct men’s attention to these eternally established written decrees. Such writings are the formal expression of an eternally-established contract, which Allah has determined shall be imposed upon those who are destined to serve Him.
This contract, which Allah decrees for men and which Islam understands to have become binding through Allah’s bestowal of the kutub and suhuf [1] on the prophets, is denoted in the Quran by the use of two words. Both of these words are unfortunately rendered ‘covenant’ in English translations of the Quran. One root, ‘ H D, has, as its primary meaning, ‘command, charge, injunction’. It can also mean ‘a contract, agreement, safeguard, promise’, or ‘the binding of oneself to make an assertion of Allah’s unity’ (see Surah 19 v. 90)[2]. The underlying idea of a command issued by Allah is brought out in Sale’s translation of the Quran, in such passages as Surahs 2 v. 119; 20 v. 114; and 36 v. 60. The verb and noun are also used of men making a contract with Muhammad in Surah 2 v. 94, and of man breaking a contract with other prophets in Surah 7 v. 100. In Surah 2 v. 39 we read that Allah will be true to His contract with the Jews if they also keep it, and in Surah 6 vv. 152 ff we find verses about covenant which remind us of the teaching of the Old Testament prophets. Any appearance of similarity with Biblical language is, however, counteracted by such a passage as Surah 2 v. 118, where Allah declares: ‘My covenant embraceth not the evil-doers.’
The second root W TH Q is a synonymn of ‘ H D, as may be seen from such passages as Surah 2 v. 25, where both roots are used. The root expresses the same ideas of ‘contract’, ‘bond’, ‘obligation’, ‘agreement’. Such contracts are made binding through the ‘books’ of Allah (see Surahs 3 vv. 75, 184; 7 v. 168; etc); and this root also has a non-religious use, when applied to the pledges and treaties made between men (Surahs 4 v. 94; 8 v. 73; 12 v. 66).
When the Christian compares the Quranic and the Biblical teaching concerning covenant, he is at first impressed by the similarity of language. He should, however, go on to ask whether the thought and intention underlying such language are identical. Is the Biblical covenant — which is the external expression of what God does in love for His sinful people — the same as that contract which Allah binds upon His slaves? The Christian will also remember that, in the Bible, men are regarded as morally responsible beings, and are spoken of as taking the initiative in renewing their covenant with God (e.g., 2 Chron. 29:10). He will also remember that God does not merely make agreements with men, but graciously enters into their affairs and works in History. The Biblical teaching about covenant reveals God to be self-sacrificing in what He has done to save men from their sins. God gives of Himself to the uttermost in His Son, not by way of a contract or bargain, but of His free grace. ‘God commends His own love toward us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.’ God’s New Covenant is the salvation-covenant in Christ’s blood. This is the unspeakable gift of God in Christ. Such teaching about a covenant of grace, whereby God seeks out sinful men and redeems them by Divine sacrifice, could find no place within the context of Islam. The Muslim prefers to think of Allah as One who does as He pleases and, at will, guides man to Paradise or leads him to Hell.
The preceding statement brings us to the second point in our study, namely, the guidance of Allah. This guidance should be regarded as a twofold activity; for the Quran speaks of Allah as One who both leads men aright and leads them astray. Allah brings men to destruction or to security. If we examine the contexts in the Quran, in which the verb for ‘right guidance’ is used, we learn that Allah guides believers and prophets whom He has elected (Surahs 6 v. 80; 6 v. 87 f; 22 v. 53; etc); and that, had Allah pleased, He would have guided all men aright (Surahs 6 v. 150; 13 v. 30). A Book also gives guidance (Surahs 2 v. 1; 3 v. 132; etc), such as the Tawrat (Law of Moses) and the Injil (Gospel) (Surah 3 v. 2), which are bestowed on men by Allah. No guidance can prevail against the contrary determination of Allah (Surahs 39 v.37; 40 v. 35), but there are passages such as Surah 41 v. 16, in which man is stated to prefer ‘blindness’ to Allah’s guidance.
The root used in the Quran for ‘misleading’ is D L L. In a number of passages this root is used of Allah’s misleading and is contrasted with His guidance. Allah leads astray whom He pleases and guides whom He pleases (Surahs 6 v. 39; 7 vv. 154, 177; 14 v. 4; 16 vv. 39, 95; etc), though we also read that Allah leads astray only the evildoers (Surahs 2 v. 24 f; 14 v. 32). Such statements as the latter cannot however detract from the Muslim doctrine of Allah as the creator of man’s acts, evil and good. Orthodox theology prefers to turn to such passages as, ‘Whoever Allah wishes to guide, He expands his breast to Islam; but whomsoever He wishes to lead astray, He makes his breast tight and straight’ (Surah 6 v. 125). ‘A sect Allah guides and for a sect error is due’ (Surahs 7 v. 28; 16 v. 38). Whomsoever Allah misleads, there is no guide for him (Surahs 4 vv. 90, 142; 7 v. 185; 13 v. 35; etc), and such a man’s resort is Hell (Surah 17 v. 99).
In some of the lists of Allah’s ‘Ninety-nine Beautiful Names’ Allah, like Satan in the Quran (Surah 28 v. 14), is given the title of ‘the Misleader’ (mudill).[3] We may however remember that when Satan misled the prophet Muhammad into the admission that the goddesses of Mecca were to be recognised (Surah 53 v. 19 f), Allah corrected the prophet through the angel Gabriel. Satan’s misleading can therefore be nullified if Allah wills. ‘So have we made for every prophet an enemy — devils of men and jinn; some of them inspire others with specious speech to lead astray; but had thy Lord pleased they would not have done it’ (Surah 6 v. 112). A convert from Islam once remarked to the writer that Allah’s misleading is worse that that of the Devil, for he who is misled by Satan may be rescued, but there is no guide for him whom Allah leads astray. The same verb is used to denote the misleading of men by sinners, by Satan and by Allah, and all such misleading leads to man’s destruction. The only difference discernible between the misleading of Allah and that of Satan or sinners is that Allah’s misleading is certain of success. Satan and sinner may fail to mislead — if Allah pleases.
The Christian reader may ask at this point, Is the Bible entirely free from
teaching of this kind? What of the expressions used in the translations of
such passages as Jeremiah 20:7 and Ezekiel 14:9? What of the ‘lying spirit’
in the mouth of Ahab’ prophets (1 Kings 22:23)? In the book of Jeremiah,
the prophet complains that God has ‘led him on’ to make certain statements,
— but Jeremiah accuses God unjustly, for the prophet was ultimately vindicated.
The same idea is present in Ezekiel 14:9 and 1 Kings 22:23, with this difference
that God declares that His act of ‘enticing’ the false prophets is the punishment
for their and the people’s sins. There is no suggestion here of that misleading
into sin which is the work of Allah and (if Allah wills) of Satan and sinners.
In the Bible the verbs used for evil and deceit as practised by Satan and
sinners are never used in connection with God.
Along with the causative use of the root D L L in the Quran, there are also
other intransitive uses where the prophet Muhammad (Surah 93 v. 7) and
others are said to have ‘gone astray.’ Men are ‘lost’ (another root expressing
this idea is KH S R), as we read in Surah 32 v. 9, and, as sinners, they
err and cannot find the way (Surahs 17 v. 51; 25 v. 10; etc). Such people
are often described as ‘blind’ (Surahs 17 v. 74; 45 v. 22; etc), and the
figure suggested is that of a blind man who has left the path and is lost
in the untracked wilderness. The same idea is expressed by the word used
in the Gospels of those whom the Son of Man came to seek and to save (St
Luke 19:10). But there can be no more illuminating illustration of the difference
between Allah’s attitude of indifference to the lost and God’s redemptive
search for them than that which is afforded by a study of similar words in
the Quran and the Bible. God’s attitude to the ‘lost’, as set forth in St
Luke, chapter 15, should be compared with the Quranic teaching about ‘those
who err’ or who, as ‘wrong doers’, are led astray by Allah to Hell (see Surah
14 v. 32 ff). ‘Verily Allah leads astray whom He pleases and guides whom
He pleases; let not thy soul (Allah says to Muhammad) be wasted in sighing
for them’ (Surah 35 v. 9).
In the Quran the root GH W ’ is used in passages where Allah ‘seduces’ Satan and leads him into error (Surahs 7 v. 15; 15 v. 39). Satan also seduces men (Surah 15 v. 39), and sinners seduce others to ruin and Hell (Surah 37 v. 30). The same root is used in all these cases, and the story related in Surahs 7 and 15 introduces us to the somewhat anomalous place which Satan occupies in Islam. The first thing to be noted in the Muslim treatment of the position of Satan is that he is not ‘the prince of this world’, the prince of a realm which is in revolt against God. The Quran tells us that Iblis (as Satan is often called) is made of fire (Surah 7 v. 13), and that he was one of the Jinn (Surah 18 v. 48). The Quran derides him and scoffs at his ‘weak tricks’ (Surah 4 v. 77). Satan is never outside Allah’s control, and the story of his fall in Surah 15 vv. 25-44 reveals Satan as an ardent believer in Allah’s Unity. Satan refused to prostrate himself before any other than Allah, and after his refusal to bow down before Adam he was cursed by Allah and the extent of his activity was limited. When, in Surah 38 v. 84, Satan boasts ‘by Allah’s might’ (a significant admission) that he will seduce men, Allah replies: ‘It is the truth, and the truth I speak; I will surely fill Hell with thee and with those who follow thee.’ Allah has determined to fill Hell with men and Jinn (Surahs 11 v. 120; 7 v. 178) and Satan is one of His instruments.
Elsewhere, the Quran speaks of Satan as a troublemaker (Surahs 5 v. 93; 12 v. 101), who is even able to deceive men so that they associate him with Allah in worship (Surahs 7 v. 190[4]; 14 v. 26). He has the power to throw something into the words of apostles and prophets, but Allah annuls what Satan interpolates (Surah 22 v. 51). The Quran, and Islamic opinion, cannot tolerate the idea of a realm of evil which is outside Allah’s creative activity, and, although Satan may be an ‘evil companion’, an ‘open foe’ of man and a ‘rebel’, he has no power over those who believe (Surah 16 vv. 100 f), but only over those who take him for a patron and over the idolaters.
As a rule, Muslim Traditions illustrate and develop the teaching of the Quran. Tradition gives point and emphasis to Quranic teaching (as we shall see again when studying the Muslim doctrine of Predestination in the following chapter), but there is almost a conspiracy of silence about the fall of Satan. The Mishkat briefly mentions his fall, and informs us that, when Satan hears the recitation of the Surah called ‘Prostration’, he remembers the order which he received to prostrate himself, and weeps that he did not do so and because he is destined for the Fire. The birth-cry of a child is also due to the touch of Satan, declares the Mishkat, but Jesus and His mother were protected from that touch. The portion of Satan in the prophet Muhammad’s heart was taken out by Gabriel when the prophet was a child.[5]
The curious legend, which appears in the Quran and connects the fall of Satan with the creation of Adam, was the subject of theological discussion in Muslim circles at an early date. The early theologians of Islam were shocked at the realisation that Allah damned Satan because Satan refused to adore Adam. Was not Satan, even in his disobedience, a stubborn champion of the Unity of Allah — the fundamental dogma of Islam? Moreover, the singular fact that Allah had inexplicably ordered the angels to adore a created being, one other than Himself, led these theologians to certain conclusions concerning the unforeseeable arbitrariness of Allah’s will and about the ever-present possibility of His wile (makr). This opinion about Allah’s wile or craft was not pure conjecture, but was based upon the teaching of the Quran itself. Although men may be crafty in devising evil, ‘yet Allah is the best of the crafty ones’ (Surahs 3 v. 47: 8 v. 30). None is secure against the craft of Allah (Surahs 7 v. 97; 13 v. 42; 27 vv. 51f). The wicked plot against Allah, but Allah is quicker at stratagem, and His messengers write down the stratagems men use (Surah 10 v. 23; cp. also Surah 14 v. 47). The same verb is used of Allah’s stratagems in the above passages as is used of the stratagems of the wicked and the kafirs (Surah 6 vv. 123 f; 13 v. 33; 16 v. 47). The latter will suffer the torment of Hell (Surah 35 v. 11).
On the basis of such considerations concerning Allah’s wile, and in the light of the circumstances of Satan’s fall, the theologians deduced that man must obey without attempting to understand the workings of the Omnipotent Will with its superlative wile. This obedience is the Islamic standard of virtue for, says al Kharraz[6] (died A.D. 899), Allah does not trouble Himself about His creatures, and their deeds do not move Him, ‘for if any of His creatures’ actions had been able to please Him, then indeed the act of Satan would have aroused all His leniency.’
Some Sufis (Muslim mystics), in the interests of their own doctrines, have declared that Satan ought to have bowed before Adam, because Adam was created in the very image of the divine splendours, alive, real and speaking. The Sufi theologian al Hallaj (died A.D. 922) writes in his book Kitab al Tawasin[7] (chapter 6, verse 6), that before his fall ‘there was not among the heavenly ones a professor of Allah’s unity like unto Satan.’ In the same chapter al Hallaj tells the story of Satan’s damnation in the following verses:
Allah said to him ‘Adore.’ Satan replied, ‘None except Thee.’ Allah said to him, ‘And if my curse be upon thee?’ Iblis replied, ‘None except Thee.’ (Satan then goes on to say,) ‘In refusing to obey Thee I glorify Thee. . .’ (v.9).
Allah said to Satan, ‘Dost thou not make prostration, O contemptible one?’ Satan replied, ‘I am a lover and a lover is despised. Thou sayest “contemptible,” but I have read in the Preserved Book of that which will happen to me. . .’ (v. 27). Allah (praised be He) said to Satan, ‘Election is mine, not thine.’ Satan replied, ‘All election and my choice are Thine . . . If Thou dost forbid my making prostration, then Thou art the One who forbids . . . If Thou hast willed that I should prostrate myself before him (Adam), then I am at Thy disposal. . .’ (v. 28).
Thus the argument moves to a close, and we see that the Sufi theologian focuses our attention upon the all-important fact that every act and every future is decreed. All is fixed by Allah’s decree, and Satan, like all other created beings, is entirely at Allah’s disposal, either to perform acts of obedience, or to fulfil Allah’s decree by his refusal. If Allah had so decreed, then Satan would have bowed before Adam; but Satan fell, since Allah had decreed that he should, and had willed the act which would mark his fall.
Two unorthodox Muslim sects, known as the Khawarij and the Mutazila, attacked the orthodox theologians by making skilful use of the Quranic account of Satan’s exemplary confession of Allah’s unity. Many of the orthodox — as we shall see when discussing the Muslim conception of Faith in the sixth chapter of this book — believe that faith is merely the assent of the heart to the creed of Islam. The Khawarij and the Mutazila, however, held that Faith cannot be divorced from the works of the Law and the acts of practice. We may see from the Quranic account of Satan’s fall that, although a staunch upholder of Allah’s unity, Satan did not perform the required works, and for this reason (said the Khawarij and Mutazila) Satan was damned. The statements of the Khawarij and the Mutazila seem to suggest that those of the orthodox who do not admit the necessity for practising the works of the Law, but regard Faith as merely an adhesion of the intellect to the idea of Allah’s unity, are in much the same position as was Satan! In replying to such a suggestion orthodox Islam can only appeal to its dogma of Allah’s inscrutable and unconditioned will, and affirm, ‘All is as Allah wills; all is as Allah decrees.’ Allah decreed Satan’s reprobation and disobedience and that is enough![8]
Thus, whether we consider Allah’s covenant, His guidance and misleading, or His damnation of Satan, we cannot ignore Allah’s eternal and ineluctable decree. All things, from eternity to eternity, are ordered by His will and conform to His will in every particular. It is in the light of such considerations that we shall now proceed to discuss the subject of man and his destiny.
Notes
1 ‘Books’ and ‘leaves’; see pp. 16 f.
2 This verse should be translated according to Lane’s Arabic-English Lexicon (p. 2183, col. 1): ‘. . . except such as hath made a covenant with the Compassionate to assert His unity.’
3 1 In the book of Traditions called the Mishkat the prophet Muhammad is reported to have prayed to Allah: ‘Deceive on my behalf, but do not deceive against me.’ Such a prayer is in keeping with the teaching of the Quran. Men try to deceive Allah and betray Muhammad (Surahs 2 v. 8; 8 v. 64), but Allah deceives those who try to deceive Him (Surah 4 v. 141). The same verb is used in these passages of the sinners who try to deceive Allah and of Allah who deceives them.
Orthodox Islam has been compelled to decide whether the Quran itself is part of Allah’s deception. If Allah orders that which He does not will (see page 92, footnote 1), is it not possible that the entire Muslim dispensation is deception, and that the speech of Allah in the Quran is of His wile and is designed to lead men astray? In reply, orthodox Islam can only take refuge in the assertion that, in spite of the Quranic teaching concerning Allah’s deceit, it must be accepted that, in the Quran itself, Allah speaks truth, even when His speech is not consonant with His will!
4 This verse refers to a legend which relates that Adam and Eve are supposed to have called their firstborn ‘Abd al Harith’ (servant of Harith), Harith being Satan’s name.
5 The reader who is not familiar with Arabic or Urdu may wish to refer to an abridged translation of the Mishkat called Selections from Muhammadan Traditions which was translated by the Rev. W. Goldsack and published by the C.L.S., Allahabad. The above three Traditions are to be found on pp. 39, 7 and 292 of that translation. There are other passages where Satan’s activities are referred to. He intrudes in Muslim prayers (pp. 7, 34; see also Quran, Surah 16 v. 100) and therefore Muslims should not pray alone (p. 47). Lack of discipline in Muslim prayers gives Satan an opportunity to creep in (pp. 48, 51, 101), but the prayers of a Muslim at night counteract Satan’s influence (p. 54). Such prayers are necessary, for Satan is active at night and appears to men in visions, but cannot assume Muhammad’s form (p. 231). Satan takes up his abode in the nose during sleep (p.22), and when the sun rises upon the world it rises between the two horns of Satan (p. 27). Certain Quranic verses recited a hundred times keep Satan away during the day (pp. 114, 121). If a Muslim drops a morsel of food he should not let it lie, for Satan will have it (p. 218), and for the same reason doors should be shut at night in the name of Allah, bags tied up and water-jars covered lest Satan creep therein (p. 221). When Muslims hear an ass bray, they should seek refuge in Allah, for the ass has seen Satan (p. 122). Satan circulates in men, even in the prophet Muhammad, like the circulation of the blood (p. 164), but Allah aided the prophet and so he was safe (p. 174). The bell is Satan’s musical instrument (p. 201), and a dog black all over with two spots on it is Satan himself and should be killed (p. 216). Wine is the total of all sins, and women are the nets of Satan (p. 251).
6 See L. Massignon’s edition of Kitab al Tawasin (Paris 1913), p. 171.
7 Ibid.
8 Satan is a figure of mystery in Islam. In the Ihya ulum al Din (Vol. I, Book 1, Sect. 3/3) al Ghazali does not attempt any theological discussion of Satan, but writes as follows: ‘If Allah the Most High did not approve of rebellion and error, and did not will them, then they would come to pass through the will of His enemy, the cursed Satan. . . Many things would come to pass in accordance with Satan’s will and few would come to pass in accordance with the will of Allah the Most High.’ al Ghazali then points out that no earthly ruler would tolerate a divided dominion, and that we dishonour Allah and make Him ‘weak and impotent’, if we ascribe any dominion to Satan. See the Muslim Tamil edition of the Ihya (Madras, 1952), p. 252f. The vitally important matter of Allah’s decree will be discussed more fully in the next chapter.
Table of Contents
Answering Islam Home Page