Kitāb al-ʿIlm / Chapter IV
The governor of Kufa, Abū Mūsā, was asked about the state of a person who fought and was killed in the path of Allah. He replied that such a person would be among the people of Paradise. Upon this, ʿAbdullāh b. Masʿūd, who was present in the assembly, stood up and addressed the questioner: ‘Repeat your question to the governor a second time! He may not have understood your question well.’ Upon this warning, the man repeated his question, and Abū Mūsā gave the same answer. Ibn Masʿūd then said: ‘I do not consider your answer to be correct. In my opinion, if such a person was killed upon finding the truth in the path of Allah, then he will be among the people of Paradise.’ Thereupon, Abū Mūsā said, ‘Ibn Masʿūd is speaking the truth.’ In essence, those who seek the truth should also be this fair-minded…
If a similar objection were made to even the lowest jurist (faqīh) of our time, the jurist being objected to would become angry and would in no way accept the objection. He would absolutely refuse to accept the possibility of his own error and say: ‘Moreover, there is no need to say "if he was correct". For it is well known to everyone that a person killed in the path of Allah has attained the truth.’ Look at the state of today’s unfair disputants! If the truth is in their hands and is expressed by their tongue, how their faces blush and how embarrassed they become! And then, how stubbornly do they resist accepting the truth to the very end? Throughout their lives, how do they speak ill of the person who defeated them and try to belittle him?
After all this, they are not at all ashamed to liken themselves to the Companions (ṣaḥāba) who cooperated for the manifestation of the truth. One should not try to prevent the person in front of him—that is, his debating opponent—from moving from one proof to another, from one difficulty to another. For the debates among the early generations (salaf) took place in this manner. Whether in his favor or against him, he should keep all the subtleties of argumentative innovation (bidʿa) outside of his speech. He should avoid statements such as, ‘This statement does not bind me, you have fallen into contradiction.’ It is wrong to reject a correct statement just because it contradicts a previous statement. Yet you see that all the gatherings of disputants pass in struggle and contention. Even when a person brings forth an argument and tries to make an analogy based on a cause he supposes upon a known principle, immediately his opponent asks him about the underlying cause of the original ruling—
From Iḥyāʾ ʿUlūm al-Dīn, he is asked. The one who brings the proof replies: ‘This is how I think. If you have a more accurate view than this, state your evidence so that we may examine it together.’ Upon this, the objector says: ‘There are many other meanings here besides those you know and have mentioned… But since it is not my duty to state them, I will not say them.’ The one who brings the proof continues: ‘If you have any other claim, state it so that we may know.’ The objector insists: ‘The reality is other than what you have said, and I know it. But it is not my duty to state it.’
Thus, debates in assemblies continue without reaching any result. This wretched objector does not know that the statement, ‘I know, but I will not say, because I am not obliged to say,’ is nothing but a slander against the sharia (sharia—the sacred law). That is: If the objector does not know the meaning of the argument presented and only makes a baseless claim to silence his opponent, such a person is a fāsiq (open sinner), a liar, has disobeyed Allah, and has drawn upon himself Allah’s wrath because he has tried to appear as if he knows what he does not know. If he truly knows but does not state it, he is still a fāsiq, for he has concealed a command of the sharia. Yet if he did not conceal this command, perhaps he would save a Muslim brother from error and become a means for the spread of the truth.
If the objector’s view is weak, his opponent will explain to him that his claim is weak, and thus the objector will have the opportunity to emerge from the darkness of ignorance into the light of knowledge. Undoubtedly, when a matter concerning religious knowledge is asked, it must be answered. Therefore, for the objector to say, ‘I am not obliged to state this,’ is nothing but to say, ‘I am not stating this in order to ensure that the argumentative innovations we have introduced remain as innovations.’ If this statement does not mean this, then what does it mean? Whereas the sharia of Allah must be clearly explained. Whoever does not state it is either a fāsiq or a liar… For this reason, examine the consultation of the noble Companions and the deliberation of the righteous predecessors (salaf al-ṣāliḥīn) on a matter!
Do you ever see among them a debate or struggle in the sense that you understand? Did any of the noble Companions or the righteous predecessors ever prevent a friend from moving from one proof to another, from one analogy to another, from one—
Kitāb al-ʿIlm / Chapter IV
narration to another verse (āya)? No! A thousand times no! All the debates of the Companions and the early generations were of this kind. For they would state what came to their hearts as it was, express what they thought as it was, and deliberate accordingly. One should debate with those who are engaged in knowledge that will benefit them. Yet you see that most disputants avoid debating with scholars and those who are authorities in knowledge. Because they fear that the truth will emerge from their tongues. Therefore, disputants prefer to debate with those who are lower in knowledge and learning. For they can only impose their falsehoods on those who have not advanced in knowledge.
Besides these eight conditions regarding debate, there are many other subtle conditions. However, after learning these eight conditions well, you can easily discern who debates for the sake of Allah and who does not. In short, the devil (shayṭān), who is your severe enemy, your assailant and the one who prepares your ruin, laughs at a person who, leaving him aside, plunges into debate over issues in which the mujtahid is correct or shares in the reward with the one who is correct. That person becomes a laughingstock to the devil and a lesson to those who possess ikhlas (ikhlas—sincerity). For this reason, the devil has led him into the darkness of the calamities that we will enumerate in later sections. We will discuss those disasters at length later. Success and help are from Allah. The Consequences of Debate and the Evil Character Traits Arising from Debate Debating among the people by raising one’s voice in order to defeat, silence, and display one’s virtue and honor, and to benefit from the attention of the public, is a type of debate that Allah deems ugly, but which the enemy of Allah, the devil, finds beautiful.
Such debates are like arrogance (kibr), self-admiration (ʿujb), envy (ḥasad), rivalry (munāfasa), self-purification (tazkiyat al-nafs), ambition for rank, and similar inner vices. If a person is given the choice between drinking wine and committing other vices, and he considers wine the lesser evil and drinks it, but then the wine leads him to other vices, then likewise—
From Iḥyāʾ ʿUlūm al-Dīn, whoever is overcome by the love of silencing others, prevailing in debate, seeking rank, and slandering, this love drags him into all kinds of filth and gathers all evils in his nafs (nafs—the lower self). Again, this love becomes the cause for all evil character traits to gather in this person. The evidence explaining that all these traits are ugly will be mentioned later in the section on the Destroyers (Muhlikāt), based on verses (āyāt) and hadiths. But for now, let us point to some of the evil character traits provoked by negative debate: 1. Envy (ḥasad) The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘Envy consumes good deeds just as fire consumes wood.’163 A disputant can never free himself from envy.
Because a disputant sometimes prevails and sometimes is defeated. Therefore, sometimes his speech is praised, and sometimes that of his opponent. Thus, as long as there is someone in this world who is considered strong in knowledge and whose opinions are deemed correct, or as long as there is the possibility of someone saying, ‘So-and-so sees better than you and makes more accurate judgments than you,’ it is certain that such a person will feel envy. He will try to do everything to belittle the person who is preferred over him and to turn the hearts that are inclined toward him back to himself. Envy is a destructive fire. A person burning with the fire of envy is in great torment in this world. The punishment in the Hereafter will be many times greater than in this world.
To illustrate this, Ibn ʿAbbās (may Allah be pleased with him) said: ‘Take knowledge wherever you find it. Do not listen to the words of jurists against each other. For they are like goats fighting in a pen.’ (Abū Dāwūd, from Abū Hurayra)
Kitāb al-ʿIlm / Chapter IV 2. Arrogance (kibr) and Pride (takabbur) The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘Whoever exalts himself, Allah will abase him; whoever shows humility, Allah will elevate him.’ Again, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said in a hadith qudsi, narrating from Allah the Exalted: ‘Majesty is My cloak and pride is My garment. Whoever seeks to share with Me in these two, I will break his back!’ (The words ‘cloak’ and ‘garment’ in the hadith should not be understood literally.) A disputant can never rid himself of the disease of appearing superior to his peers. He wants to appear much greater than he is. Indeed, these prideful fools even quarrel over any seat in the assembly of debate. They pursue sitting at the head of the assembly, claiming that the chief seat belongs to them.
Because they do not consider anyone else worthy of these places, they jostle and push each other, arguing about who should go first when passing through a narrow path. The cunning ones among such disputants say: ‘By behaving this way, we are preserving the dignity of knowledge; for it is forbidden for a scholar, especially a believing scholar, to humiliate himself.’ They do not know that Allah and His Messenger have praised humility, and they have come to regard as humiliation a trait that Allah and His Messenger have praised! Again, they dress the garment of honor upon arrogance, which is a state that Allah and His Messenger have condemned! Thus,
164) Khaṭīb, (from ʿUmar with a sound chain) 165) Abū Dāwūd, Ibn Mājah, and Ibn Ḥibbān (from Abū Hurayra)
From Iḥyāʾ ʿUlūm al-Dīn, they oppose Allah and His Messenger. Thus, by distorting beautiful words, they become a cause for people to go astray! Indeed, they have also distorted words like wisdom, knowledge, and similar terms, causing people to fall into misguidance!… Malice (ḥiqd) A disputant cannot free himself from harboring malice. Yet the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘A complete believer is not rancorous.’ There are so many hadiths condemning malice that it is impossible to conceal them. In a debate, we have never seen a disputant who, while nodding as if agreeing with his opponent, does not harbor malice toward him. For a disputant does not listen to the words of the other disputant, nor does he receive these words with good intentions.
Therefore, a disputant is compelled to harbor malice toward the other. Concealing that malice in his nafs is only possible through hypocrisy (nifāq). But most of the time, the malice that is harbored becomes manifest, and everyone observes it. How can a disputant free himself from harboring malice in this situation? It is impossible for all listeners to side with him. Nor are those who listen to his arguments obliged to accept them as valid… Thus, if his opponent belittles his words even a little, he cannot forgive this, and because of it, he can never uproot the malice from his qalb (qalb—the heart) for the rest of his life. (This is the very essence of disaster.) Backbiting (ghība) Allah the Exalted has likened backbiting to eating the flesh of a dead brother.
Yet the disputant can never free himself from eating the flesh of the dead. For he always relates his opponent’s speech and speaks against him. No matter how careful he is to avoid this, no matter how accurately he relates his opponent’s words, he cannot refrain from backbiting. For by saying that his opponent’s speech is wrong, he commits backbiting. By saying that his opponent’s speech shows his incapacity and that he is inferior to himself, he commits backbiting. Or, worse, he relates what his opponent did not say and thus becomes a liar. At the same time, he becomes a slanderer. 166) ʿIrāqī was not aware of this hadith.
Kitāb al-ʿIlm / Chapter IV
He can never restrain his tongue from violating the honor of those who do not pay attention to his own speech but listen to his opponent’s words. He accuses them of ignorance, stupidity, and narrow-mindedness! Self-purification (tazkiyat al-nafs) Allah the Exalted invites us not to purify ourselves. ‘So do not claim purity for yourselves. He knows best who is God-conscious (muttaqī).’ (al-Najm, 53:32) When a wise man was asked, ‘What is the ugly truth?’ he replied: ‘It is a person praising himself.’ A disputant cannot refrain from praising himself for being strong, prevailing, and superior to his peers in virtue. During debate, he cannot help but say at least this much: ‘I am not among those who do not know all these matters.
I am advanced in the sciences. I know the principles and methods of every science. I have memorized many hadiths.’ With such statements, he keeps praising himself. Sometimes, he is compelled to say such things so that his speech will be taken seriously. Yet everyone knows that praising oneself foolishly and purifying one’s nafs for any reason is considered ugly both legally and rationally. Spying (tajassus) Allah the Exalted says: ‘O you who have believed, avoid much [negative] assumption. Indeed, some assumption is sin. And do not spy or backbite each other.’ (al-Ḥujurāt, 49:12) The disputant investigates the faults of his peers, constantly striving to find the flaws of his opponent. Even when he is told, ‘A disputant has come to your town,’ he immediately sends one of his men to learn the characteristics of the newcomer.
He investigates his hidden faults. So much so that when they come face to face for debate, he can embarrass his opponent because of his private faults.
From Iḥyāʾ ʿUlūm al-Dīn, he can use these as weapons to defeat his opponent in debate… Of course, these weapons are used against the opponent when needed… The disputant goes so far in searching for his opponent’s faults that he even tries to uncover things he did in childhood… He tries to find even his physical defects. Perhaps he committed a crime in his childhood or has a physical defect, such as being bald… or being deaf… When faced with the danger of being defeated in debate, he tries to embarrass his opponent by mentioning these faults. If he is a capable person in the subject of debate, then he points out his opponent’s faults by way of allusion.
If he is arrogant and, because of his arrogance, also foolish, he shouts all these faults in his opponent’s face. Many stories are told about the leading figures among disputants in this regard… Rejoicing at the misfortune of others and grieving at their good fortune In Islam, there is the ethic of not wanting for your brother what you do not want for yourself, and wanting for your brother what you want for yourself. Those who are compelled to boast over others with their virtues rejoice at the misstep of a friend. For everyone they see as their equal in knowledge and virtue is, in a sense, a rival, and especially their attitudes toward each other are like the attitudes of co-wives toward each other.
Just as a co-wife begins to tremble when she sees the other and absolutely cannot bear to see her, likewise, when a disputant sees the other, his face turns pale, he trembles, and does not want to see him. It is as if the other is a cunning devil or a monster trying to suck his blood! So we ask: Where is the closeness and intimacy that Islam desires? Where is the respect and love that religious scholars show to each other? Where is the help that religious scholars give each other in any difficulty? Where is brotherhood, assistance, and affection? Indeed, Imām al-Shāfiʿī said: ‘Knowledge among people of virtue and intellect is a chain that binds them together.’
Kitāb al-ʿIlm / Chapter IV
So we ask: How can those who make knowledge a means of enmity claim to be followers of Imām al-Shāfiʿī? Is it possible to establish brotherhood, intimacy, and friendship in a society that boasts of defeating its friends? Certainly, it is not possible in any way! This much evil is more than enough to corrupt people, to remove the pious and God-conscious (muttaqī) servants from the character of the believers and to push them into the character of the hypocrites (munāfiqūn)… Hypocrisy (nifāq) There is no need to bring evidence to show the evil of hypocrisy or to prove its evil with evidence. Disputants are almost compelled to fall into hypocrisy. For they are forced to encounter their opponents and the friends of their opponents at every moment. They must show love with their tongues and display affection outwardly.
They must take into account their ranks and states and strive not to offend them, but rather to win them over. Yet those who speak, plead, and listen know that all these words are lies. They know that since this person is an opponent, he is engaging in hypocrisy, slander, and wickedness. For disputants only show love to each other with their tongues. In their hearts, however, they harbor an indelible hatred toward each other. We seek refuge in Allah, the Exalted, from such hypocrisy! The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘When people learn knowledge but abandon action, love each other with their tongues but harbor hatred in their hearts, and cut off ties of kinship among themselves, Allah will curse them and make their ears deaf and their eyes blind!’167 167) Ṭabarānī, (from Salmān al-Fārisī with a weak chain)