"Mansal al-Sairin" (The Stages of the Wayfarers), the esteemed work of Khwajah Abdullah Ansari, shines brightly like a radiant lamp, illuminating the path of spiritual journey for the seekers of truth. This work, by delineating the stages of spiritual ascent from awakening to union, guides humanity towards perfection. Among the discussions in this book, the critique of fatalism and the explanation of human free will holds a special place, as these two concepts form the foundation of both the ethical and mystical systems. This lecture, drawn from the speeches of , , delves deeply into this subject, providing a critical analysis of intellectual deviations, including the fatalism of the wandering ascetics (Qalandari) and the superficial religious zealotry, while illustrating the way of divine mysticism.
Fatalism is a viewpoint that attributes every human action directly to divine will, thus negating human free will. This approach, referred to in the lecture as Qalandari and Darwishism, is accompanied by negligence and irresponsibility, attributing every actbe it virtuous or sinfulto the will of God. Such a perspective dismantles the moral order and absolves individuals from responsibility for their actions. As expressed in the lecture, fatalism is akin to a pot made from impure clay that contaminates the pure water of ethics.
Key Point: Fatalism, by denying human free will, disrupts the moral system and leads to irresponsibility and chaos. Divine mysticism rejects this viewpoint and holds individuals accountable for their deeds.
The theological critique of this view traces its roots to the historical discussions of the Ash'ari school, which advocated for fatalism in human actions. However, the lecture, by referencing verses from the Holy Qur'an, such as "ثُمَّ رَدَدْنَاهُ أَسْفَلَ سَافِلِينَ" (Surah At-Tin: 5), emphasizes the free will of humans. This verse, which alludes to the potential for both the ascent and fall of humanity, demonstrates that God created humans with the freedom to choose the path of perfection or destruction.
This verse serves as a radiant torch that illuminates the path of free will and challenges fatalism. The lecture humorously compares fatalism to an individual committing an inappropriate act in the street, and upon saying "God willed it," absolving oneself of responsibility. This metaphor clearly shows the deviation of the Qalandari mindset, which, rather than correcting behavior, justifies it.
The lecture distinguishes between "Iqta'aa" (divine will) and "Causality" (human free will), addressing one of the complex theological issues in Islamic discourse. Iqta'aa refers to God's absolute dominion over the world, but this dominion does not negate human free will. God, like a wise gardener, provides the soil for growth, but the human being, like a free tree, may bear either good or harmful fruit.
This verse emphasizes God's absolute power, yet the lecture explains that God created humans with free will, enabling them to act as they wish. Had fatalism prevailed, the punishment of Hell would have been unjust, as humans would be like puppets, forced into actions. This view aligns with the concept of "Kaseb" in Islamic theology, which holds that humans are responsible for their actions, even though they are under God's dominion. For scholars, this discussion can be compared to Kant's philosophy of freedom and moral responsibility.
Key Point: Divine will provides the conditions for human free will but does not negate it. Humans, through their own will, are responsible for the good and bad of their deeds.
One of the key points of the lecture is the critique of fatalistic interpretations of verses such as "مَا أَصَابَ مِنْ مُصِيبَةٍ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَلَا فِي أَنْفُسِكُمْ إِلَّا فِي كِتَابٍ مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ نَبْرَأَهَا." Fatalists interpret this verse as implying absolute determinism in human fate, but the lecture emphasizes that this verse demonstrates divine Iqta'aa (possibility of occurrence), not fatalism.
This verse, like a golden tablet, demonstrates God's prior knowledge but does not negate free will. The lecture uses the example of giving charity to avert calamities, illustrating that humans can change their fate through their actions. This view aligns with Shi'a interpretations, particularly in the works of Sheikh Mufid and Allama Tabatabai, who reconcile divine predestination with human free will. For academic audiences, this debate can be compared with Leibniz's philosophical theories of determinism and free will.
Key Point: Qur'anic verses, like the verse from Surah Al-Hadid, demonstrate divine possibility, not fatalism. Humans, through their actions, can change the course of their fate.
Section One, by critiquing fatalism and explaining human free will, clarifies the foundation of the mystical and ethical system. Fatalism, like dust on the mirror of truth, conceals human responsibility, but divine mysticism, by emphasizing divine possibility and human free will, guides the seeker toward perfection. Qur'anic verses, like bright torches, affirm the truth that humans, through their own will, are responsible for their deeds.
Part Two delineated the distinction between divine mysticism and the extremes of asceticism and dry religiosity, thereby charting the balanced path of spiritual progression. Divine mysticism, akin to a golden bridge, connects the laws of Sharia, the path of Tareeqat, and the ultimate Truth, liberating individuals from the swamp of negligence and the rocky terrain of excessive rigidity. This section invites scholars to reassess the history of mysticism and critically examine its deviations.
The lecture begins by addressing the Safavid period, highlighting the conflict between the dervishes and scholars that led to massacres and societal divisions. This conflict, much like a raging fire, burned through religion and society, making the spiritual journey fraught with obstacles. The speaker likens these two factions to two sharp blades of the scythe, each inflicting its own wound upon the body of religion. The historical analysis touches on the role of the Qizilbash and the official scholars of this period, who, due to doctrinal and political differences, engaged in the suppression of one another. For scholars, this discussion can be examined through Max Webers theories regarding the institutionalisation of religious deviations.
The lecture critiques the exploitation of the naivety of people by some dervishes, with a specific reference to an experience in the Gonabad region. In this example, people offered their saffron to their spiritual leader, while he adorned his home with expensive carpets. This act, akin to theft cloaked in sanctity, eroded the trust of the people.
The sociological analysis attributes this behaviour to economic deviations within Sufi currents. For scholars, this section could be compared with Peter Berger's theories on the institutionalization of religious deviations.
The lecture, with biting sarcasm, criticizes the naivety of the people in accepting unverified narratives, calling it "credulity." According to the speaker, people are so gullible that they would believe if told "God has left this world." This critique emphasizes the necessity for a logical and critical approach to religious narratives. Theological analysis emphasizes the importance of methodology in the critique of hadith and Islamic history. The lecture, using exaggerated tales such as those concerning the hidden knowledge of the Imams, demonstrates that some narratives are not in harmony with reason and Sharia. This perspective aligns with the views of foundational scholars like Sheikh Ansari.
Part Three, through the critique of historical and social deviations, demonstrated how conflicts between dervishes and scholars, religious exploitation, and credulity have, like thorns, harmed religion and society. Divine mysticism, with an emphasis on reason, fairness, and wisdom, paves the way for liberation from these deviations.
The lecture, stressing that the Imams acted in judicial matters based on apparent rules, critiques exaggerated beliefs regarding their knowledge of the unseen. According to the speaker, if the Imams knew everything through esoteric knowledge, they could not serve as judges, as judgment requires tangible evidence. Theological analysis addresses the scope of the Imams' knowledge of the unseen. The lecture, referencing the judicial conduct of Amir al-Muminin (A), shows that the Imams adhered to Sharia rules in judicial affairs. This view aligns with Sheikh Tusis opinion in Al-Iqtisad, where esoteric knowledge is conditioned by divine will.
The lecture critiques stories such as Imam Reza (A) knowingly consuming poison, verse "Do not throw yourselves into destruction," deeming it incompatible with Sharia. This critique highlights the necessity of examining the authenticity and content of narrations.
"Do not throw yourselves into destruction." (Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:195)
This verse, like a strong shield, prevents people from rushing toward death, thus invalidating exaggerated tales.
Part Four, through critiques of exaggerations in the esoteric knowledge of the Imams and unverified stories, demonstrated that true recognition of the Imams requires reason and critique. The Imams, as just judges, adhered to apparent rules to ensure justice.
The lecture, emphasizing "a man is nothing but a divine scholar," identifies the balance between mercy, fairness, and wisdom as the key traits of the divine mystic. The speaker, using an example of pardoning someone who unintentionally caused harm, highlights the importance of discerning prudence. Ethical analysis aligns this view with the concept of moderation in Islamic ethics, as found in works such as Akhlq-i Nir by Khwajah Nasir al-Din Tusi. For scholars, this topic can be compared with Aristotle's theories in virtue ethics.
The lecture criticizes fatwas such as declaring mens athletic socks or sandals as haram for women, considering them an example of dry religiosity. This critique underscores the necessity of dynamic ijtihad and attentiveness to cultural norms. Legal analysis aligns this view with the opinions of scholars like Sistani, who emphasize adapting Islamic jurisprudence to social needs.
The lecture, comparing Iranian and Western cultures, underscores the importance of fairness. The speaker points to examples such as cleanliness in the West and emotional warmth in Iran, illustrating cultural differences. This view is aligned with Clifford Geertz's theory of cultural relativism.
Part Five, with an emphasis on balance in religious and social behaviour, demonstrated that the divine mystic, through wisdom and fairness, paves the way for spiritual progress. Critiques of unrealistic fatwas and the call for cultural fairness make this lesson valuable for scholars.
The lecture critiques the misinterpretation of the narration "Who harms them, harms God," which includes tyrants like Shimr. The speaker argues that this narration applies specifically to the infallible and the oppressed. Theological analysis underscores the importance of contextualizing narrations. This view is consistent with the interpretative methods of Allama Majlisi in Bihar al-Anwar.
The lecture critiques forged narrations, such as the story of Abu Bakr being the living dead, comparing them to authentic narratives regarding Amir al-Muminin (A). This critique highlights the need to examine both the chain of narration and the content.
Part Six, through the critique of misinterpretations and forged narrations, demonstrated that understanding religion requires intellect and critique. This lesson invites scholars to revisit the methodology of religious narratives.
The lecture, referencing an experience in Gonabad, shows how the divine scholar helped bring about social peace by uniting dervishes and scholars. The speaker criticizes the historical conflicts between these two groups. Sociological analysis compares this experience with Lewis Cosers theories on conflict management. The divine scholar, like a solid bridge, transforms division into unity.
Part Seven, with an emphasis on the divine scholar's role in social peace, demonstrated that wisdom and fairness are key to unity. The Gonabad experience and Imam s model make this lesson valuable for scholars.
