NOT FOR SALE

Introduction to Islamic Theology

By:

PARAMOLE, Kabir Olawale, PhD, FCAI

Introduction

Theology has been described as discussion on divine nature of Allah and broadly as
issues covering all aspects of divinity. The Prophet of Islam during the early days of his
mission was the custodian of Islamic knowledge and used to painstakingly explain issues
to his companions. He made sure that they understood every issue as directed by divine
injunctions. He was able to avoid ear splitting arguments among his companions and
would dissuade them from asking questions on such issues that would harm their faith.
This discussion has in some quarters been misunderstood as an encouragement of
dogmatism that some companions immediately after the death of the Prophet (SAW)
would not listen nor encourage people advancing “new reasons” or “arguments” for
issues never fully discussed by the Prophet. All issues, they wanted to believe bila kayfa
(without questioning how).

The above position of the literalist companions was not the actual stance of the Prophet
(SAW). He had actually allowed people to take independent position on issues, yet they
must not be the harmful ones that can reduce them in faith. In point of fact Islam poses
various challenges to its adherents in the contents of the Qur’an to always reason. There
are passages challenging men to use their reason and there are passages commanding
them to exploit all aspects of human endeavours. Prophet Muhammad (SAW) once sent
Mua‘dh b. Jabal to Yemen as a Judge and asked him: “With what shall you judge?
Mua‘dh replied “with the Holy Qur’an. Prophet: “What if you don’t find it in Qur’an?
Mua‘dh”: “I shall resort to your Sunnah.” Prophet: “What of if you don’t find it there?”
1
Mua’dh: “I shall use my personal discretion”. Then the Holy Prophet praised Allah by
saying “Praise be to Allah, Who has guided the apostle of His Apostle,” The above
confirmed the permissibility of individual reason by the Prophet, once it agreed with the
tenets of Islam.

In spite of people having minor differences in their understanding of some aspects of

faith at this period, the whole of Islam remained united in all sphere of lives until the
second part of the reign of ‘Uthmaan Bn ‘Affaan (R.A).

Circumstances Which Led To Schism in Islam

The Prophet was succeeded as the political head of the young Islamic State by Khalifah
Abu Bakr (632-634 C.E). He was also succeeded by ‘Umar Bn al-Khattaab (634-644
C.E).

‘Umar in turn was succeeded by ‘Uthmaan Bn ‘Affaan (644-656- C.E). It was during the
second half of the reign of ‘Uthmaan that certain event started rearing up their heads and
it was the effect of these events that led to the emergence of schism in Islam. ‘Uthmaan
whose reign was initially characterized with extra–ordinary prosperity for Islam and the
Muslims had his name sacrilegiously maligned before his death. ‘Uthmaan whose armies
entered on the one hand in Spain and on the other Transoxiana, was later accused of
recklessness, injustice and favouritism. ‘Uthmaan who was so pious that he would not
accept salary for the caliphate out of contentment that he was rich enough and had no
need of public fund was accused of connivance in siphoning the public money to the
covers of Banu Umayyad. No doubt, the leniency and generosity of ‘Uthmaan, were
acknowledged even by his vows.

In the past centuries, historians have been castigating ‘Uthmaan for all the atrocities
mentioned above but have always divided his reign into two. The first half has always
been described as that of a model and the second as that of a corrupt, or in the opinion of
the lenient ones, a weak leader. Our question here is what could have accounted for the
purported switchover of ‘Uthmaan after six years in office? The answer to the above
2
question is, “nothing wrong with ‘Uthmaan nor did he waver a little in his model
attitude”. The problem was that of a group of people arising with the aim of destabilizing
the ’Ummah. These were the people who really sowed discord among Muslims and
succeeded in achieving their aims by creating dissension in Islam. Frankly, neither Ali
nor Aisha; neither Mu‘awiyyah nor Zubayr, nor Tal‘ah could be accused or found guilty,
but those who incited them against themselves. They all remained pious until their deaths
and most of them were also certificated as inheritors of Al- Jannah.

The Roles of ‘Abdullah Bn Sabah

The leader of the discord sewers was one ‘Abdullah bn Sabah, a Yemenite of Jewish
origin. When he accepted Islam, he manifested in himself a kind of an exaggerated piety.
He used to be the first to arrive in the mosque and the last to leave. He always indulged in
supererogatory prayers, fasting and other devotional activities. Then he began a tour of
the entire Islamic empire– Hijaz, Kufah, Basrah, Syria and Egypt all with the intention of
publicizing his piety. He was able to enlist the support of people who had similar
devastating intention about the religion of Islam all over the empire and he ordered them
to await his signals for action.

The first method adopted by ‘Abdullah Bn Sabah and his cohorts was to send out letters
to provinces. These were inciting letters speaking ill of other provinces. Letters were also
received in Madinah complaining of deviations from the spirit of Islam in the provinces.
An example of such letters read thus: “Dear Brother you have happy lot. Islam is alive in
your region, governor is honest, and administration is just, whereas in my region Islam is
dead, nobody practices it, the governor is a drunkard and runs after girls, the
administration is corrupt and there are no prospects of betterment.”

These letters did not receive attention initially but at a point in time Caliph ‘Uthmaan was
admonished to do something. He sent emissaries to all provinces and all of them returned
with the report that the sources of the letters were unknown. It was only, ‘Ammar b.
Yasir who did not return on time, he found interest in an issue being raised by some

3
people who of course had a sinister motive, the dangerous Ibn Sabah was a member of
this group. ‘Ammar did not return until he was recalled by the Caliph in Madinah. The
audacity of ‘Ammar to have allowed himself to be held back by a group of people, should
normally raise suspicion, but the Caliph forgave him.

Invasion of Madinah

The group of ‘Abdullah Bn Sabah, at this time had concluded plans to invade Madinah
during the period of Hajj. This was an appropriate period as they righty supposed the
garrison would be on leave, those in Egypt left for Madinah. At the same time, the
member from Basra and Kufah also left. Some of those people it should be reiterated that
they consisted largely of the Jewish Arab who really knew what they were planning.
Other good intentioned people who were not even of the same origin but unintelligent
had also been lured into the group. They all agreed on their assignment in Madinah- to
oust ‘Uthmaan – who had been labeled “root of all evils in the empire”. They did not
however, agree on who should succeed him. The Basrans preferred Tal‘ah, and the
Kufans, Zubayr Bn ‘Awwaam. The Egyptians preferred Ali. The differences in
preference we should understand were also borne out of different names forged in signing
the inciting letters to these provinces. The Egyptians for example, had received a letter
purportedly written by ‘Ali pleading with them to assist him in chasing out ‘Uthmaan.
There were others forged in the names of ‘Aisha, Zubayr and Tal‘ah. This explained why
the cohorts of Bn Sabah could attract such a large followership especially from the pious
innocent Muslims.

Mu‘awiyyah though got information for impending invasion late yet sent an accelerated
request to the Khalifah that he is allowed to send some trusted soldiers from Syria,
‘Uthmaan declined this offer. He also dismissed the soldiers of the Madinah garrison to
proceed on leave in order to be able to perform the pilgrimage (Hajj).

On getting to Madinah, each part of the invading group went to their supposed various
mentors, i.e. Ali, ‘Aisha. Zubayr and Tal‘ah but all of these people were surprised to see

4
them. They dismissed and rebuked them that they never wrote any letters to them. All of
these people refused the offer of the caliphate and sent away the representatives of these
rebels.

Truce with the Egyptians

The Egyptians went directly to Khalifah ‘ Uthmaan and complained about their governor
who was an Umayyad. The Khalifah persuaded them and consented without condition to
their general view of removing the governor. He also accepted the nomination of
‘Abdullah Bn Abu Bakr. He wrote him a letter disposing the incumbent and installing
him (‘Abdullah Bn Abu Bakr) as the new governor. The peace manner in which
‘Uthmaan hosted these invaders put them off. On the insistence of foremost companies
such as Ali, Zubayr and Tal‘ah (all of whom had varied reservation for the Caliph but not
to the extent of deposing or killing him). The invaders thereafter returned to their various
provinces.

The Surprise Return

Surprisingly inexplicable, the invaders all returned with a captive whom those going back
to Egypt claimed to have caught with a contradictory letter to the governor of Egypt to
kill ‘Abdallah Bn Abu Bakr and his followers on their return to Egypt. They claimed the
captive has confessed it was the caliph who sent him. So they decided to deal a deadly
blow on him if he could not give them any convincing explanation. One question that had
remained uncritically perused by historian is. If they had dispersed to their various
province and those going to Egypt had caught a person, how then the Kufans and the
Basrans also returned. This was the question of Ali which the invaders dodged. The
Caliph was eventually assassinated. This led to further disagreement as the house of
Ummayad fell aggrieved with this assassination. Those who killed ‘Uthmaan, did not
have anyone to install as the Caliph. Nobody was going to accept it from them. Later,
they developed a gimmick of shouting loudly around the street of Madinah that: “If Ali
does not accept the Khilafah we shall start massacring people indiscriminately”. These

5
moved people to persuade Ali to accept the khilafah and they compelled those perceived
as threat against Ali to promise allegiance under duress. This included Zubayr and
Tal‘ah. People like Abdullah b. ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn Mas‘ud were not seen as
serious contenders so they were with the view that they would one day have a change of
heart and willingly pledge their allegiances.

4. Prelude to the Battle of the Camel

Ali was not able to fish out the murderers of Uthman nor was he able to establish a firm
authority over the control of the Islamic empire. This was because of the new of disorder
of flying rumours. The people of Ibn Saba still continued with their “letters tricks”.
Aisha, Zubayr and Talha, all receive letters promising them of supporters to fight against
Ali and oust him, so was Ali forced to look for support from the Kuffans. The two armies
met but exercised restraints before attacking each other. There was a parley between Ali
and Aisha. During the dialogue they discovered that there were being incited against one
another and reached an understanding of returning back home the following morning.
Here arose an opportunity of averting the looming bloodshed.

Ibn Saba and his people were not satisfied with this development. They created a
skirmish overnight and the two parties become suspicious of themselves. This led to an
actual battle in the morning. Both Tal‘ah and Zubayr were killed but Aisha was spared. In
the course of further discussion, they both discovered that some unscrupulous elements
really were behind the discord.

5. Battle Of Siffin

Ali was still faced with problem of maintaining the state. Mu‘awiyyah was putting up
challenge. Initially he never taught of contesting the Khilafah but wanted the
assassinators punished first. Ali could not do this because it was the same people who
killed that installed Ali. Mu‘awiyyah started gathering momentum and people were even
persuading him to wrestle the Khilafah with Ali. He thus gradually posed question before
Ali asking him the right he had to the Khilafah. Ali answered as follows: (a) I embraced
6
Islam before you and served the Prophet more than you do (b) I belong to the family of
the Prophet and caliphate must be in the family in which God has put the prophethood.
(c) I have been elected by those very people who elected the early Khilafah – Abubakar,
‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan – the people of Madinah. The fact that Ali never said he had been
appointed at Ghadir Khum as the presumptive heir of the Prophet debunked a claim later
developed by the Shi‘ahs that the Prophet had earlier nominated him and that he only
tolerated the first three Caliphs.

Later, Ali was forced to draw a battle line with Mu’awiyyah and the battle lasted for
days. At a point in time, pendulum of victory swung on the side of Ali but the shrew
generalissimo and Chief Advisor of Mu’awiyyah, Amr Al As directed that copies of the
Qur’an be tightened round the lances of people’s word. This threw confusion on the side
of Ali as some of his warriors perceived the action of the other side as a call for divine
intervention in the disagreement. Laa hukmu ila billah – “There is no judgement except
with Allah” with this confusion, the battle came to a halt and Ali was forced to agree to a
truce with Mu’awiyyah.

In our opinion, this singular act by Ali meant recognition of Mu’awiyyah as a contender
and thus raised his status from a disrespected subordinate to a recognized contender.

6. Arbitration Of Adhruh And Its Effect:

Origin of Kharijites

The party of Mu’awiyyah did not find any difficulty in appointing a representative for the
truce, the clever ‘Amr b. Al As was nominated. This was done by the people against the
choice of Malik b. Ashtar whom Ali preferred. They agreed to meet at Adhruh, each
accompanied by around 4,000 supporters, the two arbiters went inside and deliberated.
The result of the deliberation presented by them created the final effect of Abdullah b.
Sabah and his cohorts after desires. Abu Musa was first made to speak and he told the
spectators that they agreed to set aside the Khilafah of both Mu’awiyyah and Ali and
appoint a neutral person in their stead. ‘Amr b. ‘As later retorted that “You have heard
7
him confirming the removal of his candidate but as for me, Mu’awiyyah we have agreed
should be the Khalifah. “This statement threw the audience into pandemonium. There
was confusion. It also created division in the camp of ‘Ali. It led to a group of them
seceding and claiming to fight even Ali for subjecting the matter of the state to an
ephemeral decision. These people were known as the Khawaarijuun (the Kharijites:
dissenters).

The Khawaarijuun were going to have the majority of the people on Ali’s side based on
some questions they posed to ‘Ali and for the intervention of ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abbas who
sought special permission of ‘Ali to provide solution to those questions. It was Ibn
‘Abbas answers that convinced the majority to remain with Ali while the stubborn
minority seceded. The questions raised by these people were as follows:-

i. Why should ‘Ali appoint man to arbitrate in religious issues?

ii. Why did Ali fight without taking neither booties nor prisoners of war?

iii. Why did he not insist on the title Amir- al Mu’miniin to be used for him during the
arbitration?

On the first question, Abdullah replied thus:

“Regarding your statement that: “Ali has

appointed men to pass judgement in matters
pertaining to religious matter”. Allah glorified and
exalted is He says: O you who believe: kill not
game while in the sacred precincts or in pilgrim
garb. If any of you do so intentionally the
compensation is an offering of a domestic animal
equivalent to the one he killed and adjudged by
two just man among you.

8
 I adjure you by Allah is the adjudication by men in
matters pertaining to the preservation of their
blood and their lives and making peace between
them more deserving of attention than
adjudication over a rabbit whose value is only a
quarter of a dirham?

The response of the people was that adjudication

in matter of human begging was more important
than those of beasts.

On the second question Ibn ‘Abbas said:

“In regard of your statement that Ali fought without

taking captives of war and booties as the Prophet did.
Do you desire to take your mother Aisha as a captive
and treat her as fair game in the way captives are
treated? If your answer is ‘Yes’ then you have fallen
into Kufr. And if you say that she is not your mother
you would also have fallen into Kufr for Allah says:
“The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own
selves and his wives are their mothers (entitled to
respect and consideration) Q 33: 6

Choose for yourselves what you want. Thus did they also accept Abdullah’s superior
argument?

For the third point, that Ali surrendered the title Amir al-Mu’miniina, he called them back
to the period when the Prophet during the treaty of Hudaybiyyah had to forgo the title of
Rasuulullah in the treaty when the Polytheist said: “If we believed that you were the
messenger of Allah, we would not have blocked your way to the Ka‘bah nor would we

9
have fought you. The Prophet then said, while instead Muhammad b. Abdullah. While
conceding this he retorted By Allah I am the messenger of Allah even if they reject.

Those who remained in support of Ali were known as Shi‘atu ‘Ali (The Party of ‘Ali) and
after the two emerged a third liberal group known as the Murijites. These groups later
developed into various sects with different theological doctrines. It is their divisions and
doctrines that we are more concerned with in this study.

7. Theological Sects In Islam:

A. The Kharijites

Historically, majority of the Kharijities were said to be from the desert. They carried
along with them after conversion their semi-civilised desert culture and thus had hard
manners after becoming Muslims. There was also the impact of the Persian Magians on
them as most of those who joined the group later were non-Arabs converted to Islam.

In the earlier days of the Kharijites, they fomented a lot of troubles in the empire
manifesting their tense fanaticism in series of extremist proclamations and terrorist
activities. They denied the Khilafah of ‘Uthmaan after the first six years and that of ‘Ali
from the day he accepted arbitration. They branded everyone a Kafir and committed a lot
of murder in the disguise of carrying out religious duties. They branded anyone who
commits a sin an apostate that should be eliminated along with his family members. They
propagated all sorts of radical theories.

It cannot however be doubted that they loved Islam and the zeal for Islamic activities
existed among them. They however tagged people used with infidelity based on their
interpretation of various texts of the Qur’an. For example based on the verses “whosoever
does not judge with what Allah has revealed such are the infidels” they tagged even
Muslims as infidels. They killed pious people with whom they hold grudges. It was
‘Abdur Rahman b. Muljam, one of them who killed Ali for the intense enmity they had
for him.

10
There were about seven sub-sects of the Kharijites and virtually all met their demises
after various wars.

These include:-

1. THE AZRAQAT: The leader of this sub-sect was Nafi’ b. Azraqah. One of their
beliefs was that those opposing them as well as the generalities of the Muslims were
infidels the other Kharijites who do not join wars were also labeled infidels. It met its end
after many wars with constituted authorities.

2. THE NAJDAT: These were the followers of Najdah b. Awimar Hanafi. These
people did not on their own see a person abstaining from wars as an infidel. They
regarded infanticide as unlawful. They held the views that it was not compulsory to
follow an Imam in Salaat. They regarded any Muslim entering into peace treaty with a
dhimmi as guilty of death. This sub-sect was divided into three branches during the
Umayyad era and all the braches were crushed in different battles by ‘Abdul Malik b.
Marwan

3. THE SAFRIYYAT: This sub-sect was led by Ziyad b. al-Asfar and believed
amongst others that serious sins cannot be described as infidelity. The sub-sect was
crushed by Ubaydullah b. Ziyad an Umayyad leader.

4. THE AJRADIYYAT: These were the followers of ‘Abdul Karim b. Ajrad. They
held amongst other views, that until the enemy is not alive, his property could not be
claimed as war booty. They further divided into two sub-divisions. A division was of the
opinion that “when Allah commands, He causes a wish for its performance, while other
division acted to legalise an adult girl for marriage with a prohibited relation. It
extinguished naturally later.

5. THE YAZIDIYYAT: These were the followers of Yazid b. Anisah and believed
that time was to come soon when a non-Arab Prophet would appear and would repeal the
Shari’ah of Islam. This sub-sect had a lot of anti-Islamic traits and it perished naturally.

11
6. THE MAIMUNIYYAT: They followed Maimun al- Ajradi and held amongst
others that it was lawful to marry the prohibited relations: the daughters of brothers were
lawful to be married; or sisters daughters could be married, they were of the opinion that
such things were not mentioned in the Qur’an. They also opined that Suratu -Yusuf was
not a Qur’anic chapter. Their heretical traces led to their demise.

7. THE IBADIS: They followed Abdullah b. Ibad and remained closer to the
general Muslim ’Ummah. This was a moderate sub-sect. They recognized the Qur’an, the
sunnah and the Caliphs. They used to base their opinions on judgements of other schools
(the Sunni Madhaahib). There is a claim that they still exist till today in East Africa
(where former Sultan Zanzibar was said to be an Ibadi) and parts of Algeria and Tunisia
e.t.c.

The Kharijities which emerged as a sect out of political dissension started acquiring
theological views one after the other. The initial view they held was that Allah alone
could be an arbiter. Later, they started regarding caliphs who made mistakes as fallible
and having committed great sins, the non-recognition of the rights of the Quraysh to
caliphate until they started breaking up to sub-sects with a lot of divergent opinions.
Their opinions as exposed above will create a fertile ground for our assessment of their
theological and socio-political views. It should be pointed out there that it was the first
sect to emerge in Islamism and that those who stage-managed the confusion that led to
the dissension in Islam were mostly the members of the various sub-sects thus being able
to rekindle their pre-Islamic opinions.

B. The Shi‘ah Muslims

Before the battle of the Siffin, Ali camp was one and it was fighting against the force of
Mu‘awiyyah. It had earlier crushed the allied forces of Zubayr, Talha and ‘Aisha. There
were also other Muslims who abstained from the civil strives and retired to various places
in devotion. It was from the party ‘Ali after the battle of the Siffin that some people
revolted and seceded, those were the Kharijites (Khawarijuun), those who

12
remained/supported and championed the cause of ‘Ali were known as the Shi‘ah while
the generality of the Muslims put together are the Sunnis. The generality of the Shi‘ah
Muslims believed that the holy prophet had appointed ‘Ali as his successor at Ghadir
Khum, a place near Makkah on the occasion of the farewell pilgrimage. They held the
opinion that Abu Bakar, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan were usurpers of the right of ‘Ali. They
opined that the issue of succession is so sacrosanct that no Prophet, leader or Imaam
would leave it unfilled before his death hence the Ghadir Khum affair mentioned above.

They further held the views that Khalifah is a divine right of the descendant of ‘Ali and
Fatimah (some of them are of the opinion that of ‘Ali through Fatimah exclusive of other
wives). That such a person occupying the position must be a Ma‘sum (someone who is
free from errors, and, must also be a Mansus, i.e. a specified person. The specification
having been made by someone who recognizes the immunity (to committing sins) of the
Imaam and such a person should be the best man of his age.

The Shi‘ah Muslims also believe that once a Caliph (an Imaam) is appointed, he cannot
be removed, even if he commits sins and crimes of a most serious nature. It was this
doctrine that was responsible for the division among the Shiahs. This division started as a
result of the sixth Imam, Ja‘far as-Sidiq initially appointing a son of his known as Isma‘il
then renounced the appointment as a result of Ja‘far’s feeling that Isma‘il was not
religiously and morally competent again. He thus appointed another person Musa al-
Qazim to succeed him. Fortunately or otherwise, Isma‘il predeceased Imaam Ja‘far but
his supporters held the opinion Isma‘il, the seventh Imaam (who never assumed office)
had only gone into Ghayb and would remain forever, the Imaam from Ghayb. The
supporters of Imam Isma‘il are known as the Ismailian sect of Shi‘ah or the Seveners
while those who accepted Musa al-Kazim and the remaining five successors he had are
known as the Twelvers.

13
We shall not discuss the sub-sects of Shi‘ism as it is a content of another chapter.
Moreover, unlike the Kharijities there are still Shi’ah Muslims existing all over the part
of the world especially in the Persian states of Iran, Iraq and even Nigeria.

C. The Murjites: This was a sect though of a minor importance which came to
existence during this period. Its fundamental principle consisted of the suspension (irja’)
of jugdement against believers who commit sins and in not declaring them as infidels.
Specifically, the Murjites refused to agree that the suppression of some religious tenets by
the Ummayad caliphs should warrant libeling them infidels and denying them Bay’ah as
the de factor leaders of Islam. Their declaration of the Kalimah was sufficient according
to the Murjities. They also upheld that Uthman, Ali and Mu’awiyyah were all servant of
God and by God alone must they be judged. Generally, the influence of the Murjites was
on the side of tolerance and accommodation of fellow Muslims irrespective of
shortcoming.

8. Controversies On Taqdir And Emergence Of Protagonist And Antagonist

Groups

Taqdir which can rightly be described as the exact ordinance of Allah for everything
created or the fashioning of created things appropriately has in the post Quranic era
assumed a dimension of fatalism or destiny. It should be stated from the onset that the
Quranic Taqdir has no bearing with determinism, fatalism and have nothing to do with
pre-ordained decision regarding man’s work on destiny. The post-Quranic interpretation
led to disagreement on the issue and thus arose protagonist and antagonists of Taqdir as
being seen as determinism.

A. JABARITES: These groups of people were the protagonists of Taqdir. They

were of the view that man’s destiny had been impious; the decree of God on him would
come to pass. In fact, his virtuous or evil deeds are regarded as manifestations of God’s
will.

14
Among the early scholars who adhere strictly to these views were Jahm bn Safwan (d.
748 C.E). He propounded the doctrine of the divine Omnipotence of Allah (Jabr) and
absolute knowledge and decree of all men’s action and deed by God; hence they were
regarded as Jabarites (determinists or predeterminants) with the concept of their group
known as JABARIYYAH: those who upheld these doctrines were more fanatical with it
that that never compromised it with other doctrines. Anyone who attempted to weaken or
flatter their stand was always regarded as a heretic and his teachings as heresy and they
sentenced such a person to death if he was accessible to them. Among those killed were
Ja’d bn Dirham, Ghailan bn Abdl-l Malik, the Damascene both of them were killed in
743 C.E during the reign of Umar bn Abdul-Azeez. Others include Ma’bad al–Jubani of
Basrah who was killed earlier in year 599 C.E also by these people.

References Used By The Jabarites

It is necessary to note at this juncture the verses of the Qur’an and tradition of the Prophet
which the Jabarites used in support of pure –predestination and against freewill. The
verses include:

Q39:36-37 which reads thus: “There is no guide for one who Allah misguides and none
can misguide whom Allah guides….

Others include

10:25 which is as follows: “But God does call to the Home of peace: He does guide
whom he pleases to a way that is straight.”

Another is Q10:107 which goes thus: “If God touches you with hurt, there is none who
can remove it but He; if He designs some benefits for you, there is none who can keep
back His favour.

Another is Q42:12… “He enlarges and restricts the sustenance to who He wishes…”

15
The above are the references used by the Jabarites to establish their theological views
which are similar to fatalistic views and this to the best of our Knowledge is not
absolutely what Islam teaches.

It should be noted that all the references above are only establishing Allah’s complete
mastery and Omnipotence. Allah in His Might categorically and emphatically asserts that
He is all-Powerful and can stop Him. So let it be understood that Allah who is God of
Love, Justice and Mercy will not for any reason willingly misguide anyone but the above
verses are only establishing his Omnipotence. This is to say the verses are only laying on
the tremendous all-embracing power of Allah, that is incompatible and they (the verses)
should not be misconstrued as a piece of heartless imposition on a puny (a small and
weak creature).

Conclusively, all the Qur’anic references used by the Jabarites are not really establishing
what they misconceived them to be so are the tradition they lay claim on, they are mostly
isolated Ahaadith. Such traditions include the 4th tradition of Al-Nawawi’s collection and
the tradition which says: “What hits you could not possibly have missed you and what
misses you could not have hit you”.

Finally, the Jabarites (or the determinists) presumed their antagonists to be “Dualists”
who set up human being as co-creator with God by virtue of their belief that a man can
initiate his own actions and thereby determines his own fate.

B. THE QADARITES: These groups are the free-willers. Their name has nothing to
do with the name of the popularly known mystical body Qadiriyyah which was formed
by Shaykh Abdu al-Qadri al-Jilani in the 12th century C.E.

The title Qadarites or the concept al-Qadariyyah was derived from an Arabic word or
verb Qaddara i.e. to determine by measure, it is also translated by the Syrians as decree
or to ordain.

16
It is funny to learn that because this set of people laid a lot of emphasis on free-will and
address the Jabarites as those who are fanatical about Taqdir resulted in their being called
Qadarites simply because they were regarded as people against Qadar.

These people negated the absolute control of Allah (Jabr) and argued that man has been
endowed with a certain power (Qadar) to exercise self-will. They also argued that it is
undoubtful that, Allah does not do evil or condones evil practices, and that is why He
would surely punish evil doers.

They explained that He does not create some to be well to do while others are to be
wretched. They continued that wealth and poverty, success or failure in life is only the
result of each man’s opportunity and initiatives.

God does not create a particular person to do good or evil for if he were to do this, the
day judgment or punishing anyone for his evil deeds will be unnecessary and Allah the
Just is never unjust to His creatures. Thus the opponents of pre-determination cited that
man is free to act independently out of his own will.

They also buttress their points that man after being given free-will also received guidance
from Allah hence the sending of messengers and Holy Scriptures at different stages of his
development in reasoning. All these claims, the Qadarites supported with Q17.15 which
reads as follows:

“Who receives guidance receives it for his own benefits who goes astray does so to his
own loss, No bearer of burden can bear the burden of another nor would we visit with our
wrath until we had sent an Apostle (to give warning).”

To buttress their argument, the antagonists of predestination and promoters of freewill

also used to cite Q41:46 which says:

“Whoever is a righteous benefit his own soul and whoever does evil, does so to his own
perdition, your lord is never unjust to his worshippers.”

17
“Did we not assign unto him two eyes and a tongue and two lips end guide him to the
parting of the mountain ways (the ascending and the descending)”.

C: The Meaning of the Concept of Taqdir

Taqdir is derived from the Arabic word known as Qadar which implies to measure or to
ordain. A Muslim is expected to believe in al-Qadar, that Allah has the power to decree
but we should bear it in mind that the accurate and correct meaning of the concept is to
measure as seen in the following Qur’anic verses:

a) “Glorify the Name of your Lord the most High who creates then makes complete
and who measures (Qadar) then guides” (87:1-3)

Another is:

“We created everything then ordained for it a measure (Taqdir)” (25:2)

From the above quotations each of us can judge what Taqdir represents from the
Qur’anic viewpoint. In the past (post Qur’anic), some people were so fanatical in taking it
to be fatalism that those who dare express a feeling of freewill or anti-fatalistic opinions
are regarded not only as disbelievers but duly penalized-most of them with death.

Taqdir as an article of faith should be believed in but for theological discussions we

should differentiate it from fatalism.

The understanding of the true place of Taqdir will allow man to distinguish between
natural calamities and disasters and self imposed calamites and afflictions. The true
concept of Taqdir is neither in the way of the Jabarites nor of the Qadarites but an
intermediate position between the two. The position of the Jabarites is a faith in Fatalism
while that of the Qadarites is an absolute freedom for man.

The discussion on Taqdir requires such care that one must equally seek for Allah’s
guidance in order not to fall in disbelief through deliberations over it. The concept of
Taqdir can be viewed from two perspectives namely: The perspectives of Taqdir-al-

18
Haqiqi and Taqdir al-Maliki. The first, neither describe the issues over which man has
power nor control while the second, describes issues on which man has control and
freewill.

TAQDIR AL-HAQIQI: This include those incidents that are above man’s perception and
capacity such as those who are born blind or lame; those who can do nothing to help
themselves nor could their kinsmen be of aid to them. Man’s nature of creation, his
having pairs of leaps, eyes, hands and legs, all fall under this type of Taqdir.

The setting and rising of the sun is also above man’s control. The rainfall, the snow, the
eclipses of the sun and the moon are all works that are above man’s power though they
may have knowledge of how and when they occur, yet they have no direct influence of
power on the effects of their occurrences.

Belief in this type of Taqdir which includes disasters and calamities above one’s power,
has various components which includes;

I. KNOWLEDGE: One should bear it in mind that Allah (SWT) has knowledge of
what will happen and those that had happened, this knowledge is eternal, so it would be
borne in mind when anything happens that Allah does not then acquire a new knowledge
as an effect of its occurrence nor does He forget the pre-knowledge He has of what will
happen.

ii. RECORDING: It is also compulsory that an should bear it in mind that Allah has
recorded in the preserved tablet (Lawhun-mahfuz) what will happen till the day of
judgment. On this the Qur’an says: “Did you not know that Allah knows all that is in
Heaven and Earth? Surely, that is in a Book. Surely that for Allah is an easy task” (22:70)

Allah’s recording future occurrences in the Preserved Tablet does not imply that He
could forget things but to authenticate His plans and budget so that He may not be seen as
attributing all things that occurred by chances to himself for He knows in the previous

19
time before the world that people, shall attribute things “chances” hence His creating the
Lawhun Mahfuz (Preserved Tablet).

iii. WILL: One should have faith that Allah is always willful, He does things He
wills and leave those He wishes not. Nothing happens except by His will because if He
had not wanted the occurrences of evil. He could have done it within a twinkling of eyes.

iv) CREATION: This fourth makes it clear that there is a place for TAQDIR-AL-
MALIKI because it emphasized not only uniqueness of Allah and His attributes but also
on what Allah creates, so the point also stresses it that Allah creatures are to some extent
free. This notwithstanding each man will account for his deeds are also created and who
is their creator? This is not far-fetched it is entailed in Q37:96 which goes thus: “And
Allah created you what you do”.

If one bears all of the aforementioned in mind, he shall be able to know when an event
occurs as a result of Taqdir beyond human control.

TAQDIR-AL-MALIKI- This is the type of Taqdir where man is given freewill over his
deeds and when he has power over some that come across him. It is noteworthy here that
man is given a free-will over a certain things in spite of Allah’s overwhelming control
over all things. It is the free-will given to man on some issues that will make him give
account of his deeds and subsequently rewarded or published.

Following are some verse buttressing the point at hand:

i. The Qur’an says “Have we not made for him a pair of eyes and a tongue, and a
pair of lips then shown him the two highways?. (90:8-10)

The above injunction clearly states that man is bestowed with useful utensils that also
composed parts of his body and he is shown two highways which are the ways of virtues
and vices.

20
ii. Some afflictions and sorrows used to come as a test from Almighty Allah but
majority of them are things caused by men themselves for afflictions and sorrows are
misnomer things twisted from the pure and holy nature as created by God’s hands. The
Qur’an says: “Whatever misfortune happens to you is because of the things your hands
have wrought and for many (of them) He grants forgiveness (Q42:30).

The above verse makes it clear that due to free-will man may commits a sin but when he
seeks forgiveness from Allah, he is often forgiven except if the sin are often repeated.

iii. Thirdly, there are injunctions from the Qur’an directing man to do these ad leave
those things, these injunctions are also enough as establishing free-will for man, example
of such injunction is: “Allah does not charge a soul above its capacity”. (Q2:286).

iv. Fourthly, in support of free-will there are injunctions which speak about reward
and punishment – reward for the virtuous deeds and punishment for the blasphemous
acts. If there is no free-will for man and people are rewarded for virtues and punished for
evils, this would mean the mere subjection of man to a forced-will and at the same time
punishing them for what they had been enjoined to carry out.

V. Fifthly, in support of free-will the sending of Apostles to men could have been a
sheer-waste of time and energy of their messengers if all actions and deeds of men are
under divine-control but the sending of this messenger ho bears goods tiding and
warning, so that mankind have; no argument against Allah after the messenger (40:165)
is to make sure men are duly warned before calamities befall them and good tiding are
even given to the virtuous ones.

vi. Each action done by a man is felt by doer of the action for he knows that he action
at his own will, all these action done are-all rewarded and punishable while those done
under compulsion attracts neither a reward nor a punishment. A man stands it’s at his
own will, he comes in and goes out when he wishes without feeling anybody forcing him
to do a thing under coercion so he is accounted for his deeds freely done.

21
vii) Lastly, in support of the free-will aspect of Taqdir we shall draw our attention to
another Qur’anic verse which says: so approach your fields (wives) when and how you
will (2:223) this establishes the free will of a man with his wife.

Conclusion

From the foregoing we have been able to highlight the events which led to divisions in
Islamdom. It was noted that Prophet Muhammad did not leave a divided community, but
a very strong and formidable one. Also, both Abu Bakr and Umar left same peaceful
Ummah after their various leaderships. Schism in Islam actually surfaced during the
second period of Uthmaan Bn ‘Affaan, the third Caliph, when one Abdullah Bn Sabah, a
Jewish man who accepted Islam with the sole aim of causing dissension in it, and
eventually, he succeeded. It was after the death of ‘Uthmaan that Ali Bn Abi Taalib
became the last caliph in Islam, and, his reign witnessed many theological groups such
as: the Kharijites; the Shi‘ites; the Murjites; the Jabarites; the Qadarites, etc. Muslim
leaders of the period like, ‘Aishah, Mu‘awiyah, Zubayr, Tal‘ah, etc, also played several
roles as established from the above analyses.

22