The Learnings of the Glorious Quran

At-tawhid and Its Limits

Some groups of patchy beliefs take at-Tawhid (monotheism) - which is an Islamic principle - to mean the unity of the society. They allege that the first principle is that the society must originally be classless, or all the classes should be a single one. They think that at-Tawhid is the unity of the society, i.e. it has nothing to do with Allah, it is a principle that demands the unification of the society.

Some others take at-Tawhid to be a principle of knowledge, and presented it into the Islamic philosophy, saying: from the Islamic point of view, things advance towards unification, and contradictions are to be united. This is what they thought at-Tawhid to be. Similarly, they gave to other principles such meanings which; "make the bereaved of her child laugh", as the proverb says: "Yes, if one does not base one's speech and writing on a definite criterion, and carelessly plays with everything for the sake of showing off one's ideas and fancies, one may say whatever one likes, "lies have no bones to stick in the throat", as the saying goes.

When one decides to write and say whatever one desires, to play with whatever one likes - with words, literature, science, philosophy, the Qur'an and everything, a question presents itself: What does at-Tawhid the first principle of Islam's viewpoint of the world - mean? Is it to unify the society and make a single community, to tend to unify everything, or is it to recognize Allah's Oneness?

In answering this question we say: Throughout the entire Qur'an, the word at-Tawhid and its derivatives, such as "to unify, unification and unified" had never been mentioned even once - one of the surprises of the Qur'an. But the original principle referred to by the Qur'an as the top fundamental one, is stated in such forms as: "Say: Me is Allah, the One!",[^37] "your God is one God",[^38] "... worship Allah, you have no god other than Him",[^39] "...there is no god but He",[^40] "...there is no god but Allah",[^41] and many others which announce the first principle in the Qur'an, i.e. we must realize that there is only One God, and that we must worship none but Him: "Your God is one God", "And We sent to every nation a messenger (saying): Worship Allah and shun the Taghut..."[^42] The top call of all prophets is: Worship Allah and shun the satan. Therefore, the principle of at-Tawhid, as an ideological principle, can have no meaning except the unification of Allah as the only diety. Wherever the word at-Tawhid occurs in Nahjul-Balaghah and in other Islamic traditions, it has the said meaning. Consequently, interpreting this Islamic principle, at-Tawhid, differently, would be nothing but deviation, ignorance, or prejudice.

Other matters, true or untrue, have nothing to do with this principle, that is, supposing that a classless society is supported by Islam, it has no connection with at-Tawhid as an ideological principle of Islam. Even if it could be proved that Islam's opinion was to have a society without classes, still it would be related to at-Tawhid.

Stages and Limits of at-Tawhid

Believing in Allah's Oneness has many stages:

At-Tawhid in the Necessary Being, i.e. no being has come to existence by itself except Allah. In the terms of philosophy, it is the belief in a being whose existence is necessary. It is only Allah, the Exalted, whose existence is untrinsically a must, and from Whom the other beings take their existence.
At-Tawhid in creation. That is, there is no creator except Allah.

This is a logical result of the previous point.

At-Tawhid in the genetic Lordship. The third stage of at-Tawhid is the genetic management and Lordship. That is, having admitted that Allah is the Creator of the world, we have to know who its manager and director is, and whether there is anyone, other than Allah, who manages the world without having to obtain His permission. Should there be an allegation that Allah had created the world, and then its management was handed over to some others, or Allah had nothing more to do with its management, or, if He had, He had it together with some partners, it would be multitheism in Lordship or in Management. In this stage, a monotheist is that who believes that, as the creation of the world needed none other than Allah, similarly, the genetic management, directing and Lordship are exclusively Allah's.
At-Tawhid in the genetic Legislative Lordship. Having known that our Creator is Allah, and that our existence and management are exclusively in His hands, we have to believe also that .none other than Him has the right to issue orders to us and to give law for us. Every law must be endorsed by the Divine order of permission before being regarded as authorized. Admitting that all existence is from Him, none shall have the right, without His permission, to command His creatures, to bid and forbid them, and to make laws for them. This is called "unity of Legislative Lordship."
At-Tawhid in worshipping. This is another stage of at-Tawhid. It is the unity of Divinity and worship. That is, none except Allah is worthy of being worshipped: "There is no god but Allah." This is also another outcome of that natural belief inherited in man. If our existence is from Allah, the management and directing our lives are up to Him. The independent effecter in the world is He, and the rights to legislate and issue orders are solely in His hands, there remains no room for anybody else to be worshipped. Him alone we must worship, which means we should place ourselves, unquestionably, at His service. This is what servitude to Him means. Only the one who owns everything deserves to be worshipped.

In other words, deity is a result of believing in His Lordship. Man worships the one whom he feels to have complete mastery and full command over him. So, the natural outcome of the genetic and Legislative Lordship of Allah is that no one else should be worshipped.

At-Tawhid in worshipping is another stage of at-Tawhid. It means that man should worship no one but Allah. The former stage was that there was no one deserving to be worshipped except Him. This stage requires that man should practically worship no one but Allah. This is called "unity of worshipping."

You might have realized that the Qur'an regards polytheism as a sin. When the grand sins are counted, "polytheism comes at the top of the list", as they say. This is worshipping, in practice, other than Allah, even if the worshipper did not believe that his worshipped one deserved worshipping, but he did it for some interests of his.

At-Tawhid in asking help is another phase of at-Tawhid. It means that man should practically seek the help of none other than Allah. Regarding Allah to be the real effective in the world means that no gain or loss affects us unless Allah wills it. So, how can we ask help from other than Him? Should we ask it from the one in whose hands is everything, or from the one who himself is in need of help, like ourselves? So, one of the aspects of monotheism is the unity of asking help: You do we worship and You do we seek for help[^43] This is a kind of unification. In case this aspect reaches its perfection, it will change into a psychological attribute, which, in the terms of the Islamic ethics, is called "Dependence on Allah". Many ayahs, after commanding people to worship Allah, order them to depend on Him: "...and on Allah should you rely if you are believers."[^44]
At-Tawhid in fear. This is another aspect of monotheism. It means that man should fear none but Allah. Knowing that He is the real and only effective, why should we fear anyone else who can do nothing and is void of any power. All powers are originally from Him, while the others are no more than means of execution. The perfect monotheist is he who fears Allah alone, and no one else. Many ayahs enjoin: fear Allah, and fear none other than Him: "Those who convey the messages of Allah and fear Him, and do not fear any one but Allah..."[^45] and "...but do not fear them and fear Me if you are believers."[^46]
At-Tawhid in hoping is another aspect of monotheism. It means that we should place our hopes in none other than Allah. This is also a logical consequence of believing in the Genetic Lordship of Allah. If we really believe that the real effective one in the world is Allah, why, then, shall we expect any thing from anyone else? No one else can do anything, so, all hopes must be confined to Him.
At-Tawhid in love is another aspect. If one believes that all perfections and beauties originally are Allah's, one's love originally belongs to Him, while other loves are false. Our love to somebody or something is naturally caused by the perfection or the beauty which we see in the beloved. Realizing that perfection or beauty is false, and that the one who has the original perfection and beauty is Allah alone, we should not, intrinsically, love anyone else.

The perfect monotheist is the one whose heart is given up to Allah, and, should he happen to love anyone else, it would be a radiation of his love to Allah and for His sake, as it is natural that when one loves somebody, his love- covers his lover's belonging, too. If someone loves his friend he loves his clothes, his books and his house, too. Loving Allah, then, necessitates that whatever belongs to Allah is loved for that, too.

Finally, at-Tawhid reaches a stage where man becomes eyewitness of the fact that the entire existence and its affairs are in need of Allah, or, actually there is nothing but the need of Allah. In the terms of philosophy, this is expressed as: "The world of existence is the very connection, the very belonging itself, not something that belongs or has a connection." In an instance this subject appears in man in the form of a belief supported by proofs; in another instance, when man's knowledge increases and his faith becomes more perfect, it reaches a stage in which he becomes an "eyewitness" of this fact and understands it. These were the stages of monotheism (at-Tawhid)

The Border Between Polytheism and Faith

If one wants from the Islamic point of view, to become a monotheist and embrace Islam so as to be counted in this world among the Muslims and the monotheists, and, in the other world be happy and enter Paradise, must he pass through all these stages, or is it enough to have only the first one, or is there any particular limit which must be attained to, and a lower stage will not be acceptable? Which one is it?

Should the limit, which man must comprehend, be the last stage, only few individuals along the history had actually reached it, could be eyewitnesses and understood it through intuitive knowledge. As a matter of fact there were such individuals in the history, but what about the others? Should they be rejected? Of course not. On the other hand, is the first stage sufficient? i.e. somebody believes that the Necessary Being is One, but admits for others to have the attributes of creation, lordship and being worshipped. He does believe that the only self-existent being is Allah, yet he also believes that there are other world-creators, too. Naturally, this belief is contradictory. Nevertheless, there are many such self-contradicting beliefs which are believed in by people who do not recognize the duality of their contradictory beliefs. This is because of their insufficient knowledge.

For example, there are some people who believe that the Creator of the world is none but Allah, who, after having created it left it to be managed by some of His creatures, or they did it automatically even without any permission from Him by taking the management out of Allah's hands! Incidentally, basic polytheist beliefs along the history stem from this very question. Even the Arab polytheists, about whom the Qur'an says: ...the idolaters are but unclean"[^47] and "...and kill them wherever you find them",[^48] and who were the same filthy idolaters who drove the Muslims out of their homes, did not believe that the world had many creators. They believed that the management of the world was done by many, such as the angels, whom they believed to be Allah's daughters. The idols were to represent those daughters, which they worshipped in order to draw nearer to the angels - the directors of the world. They even thought that those daughters were so dear to Allah that He rejected none of their demands. Thus, they wanted them to intercade for them with Allah: ...we do not worship them save that they may bring us nearer to Allah"[^49] and Should you ask them: 'Who created the heavens and the earth?' They would most certainly say: 'Allah'."[^50] Their polytheism was in lordship and worship. Similarly were the idolaters of the time of the Prophet Joseph (Yusuf). He did not ask them: "Are sundry creators better or a single one?" He asked them: "Are sundry lords better or Allah the One, the Omnipotent?"[^51]

It is clear, then, that their polytheism was in lordship. If a person believes that the Creator is One, but the world has many lords who direct its parts - a lord for each part: for the earth, the animals, the lands, the waters, and so on, but that all of them had been created by Allah, will such a person be regarded by Islam as a monotheist or a polytheist? Undoubtedly he is a polytheist. That is, only at-Tawhid in creation is not enough.

There are, however, others who believe that the genetic manager of the world is Allah, the one who created it, yet there, are besides Him, others who have the right to make laws for the people; and to obey them, like obeying Allah, is a duty. Allah sends a law and tells people to do so and so.

There are also others who make other laws, besides Allah's, which are to be obeyed, too, i.e. both the laws of Allah and the laws of those individuals are to be enacted, and it is incumbent upon them to obey both. This is polytheism in legislative lordship: They have taken their rabbis and their monks for lords besides Allah."

The Jews and the Christians believed that the big people in the synagogue and in the church had the right to legislate laws, or change the Divine law and dispose of it, just as it is currently done by the church - to make lawful what is unlawful and vice versa. For example in Catholicism divorce had been unlawful for many years. Marriage had been an everlasting bondage between man and woman once they were wed to one another. They had to live with one another. There was no way to divorce, but of late there appeared some particular exceptions in which the Ecclesiastical Council allowed divorce, i.e. making law is in their hands. What does the Christian religion say? It says whatever the said Council says.

This is the religion of Messiah. If they have to change their opinions tomorrow, the religion will change accordingly, and yet it will remain the same Christianity, only this time it appears in a different form. This type of belief is polytheism in the legislative lordship.

It seems that the Qur'an refers to this by the said ayah about the rabbis and monks whom the Jews and the Christians regarded as their lords. Did they really believe that, say, the Pope was the creator of the world? Apparently there was no such belief in the Church nor among the Christians. They only accepted their authority to originally legislate laws, taking it a duty upon them to obey their commands as they obey Allah's, though, as regards worshipping, they were of the opinion that no one deserved to be worshipped except Allah.

Looking thoroughly into the Qur'an we realize that the said items are necessary for one to be a monotheist. That is, the monotheist, in the view of the Qur'an, is the one who sees that the attributes of being necessary and being a creator both are exclusively confined to Allah, as well as Genetic Lordship, Legislative Lordship and the only Ilah to be worshipped. And, since believing in Allah's divinity and Unity belonged to the last stage, Islam's slogan was "La Ilaha Illallah", "there is no god but Allah". It does not say: "There is no Necessary Being but Allah", "There is no Creator but Allah" or "There is no Lord but Allah'" because these alone are not enough. They must include "There is no one to be worshipped but Allah." So, the limit, here, is at-Tawhid. Believing in this turns the individual into a monotheist, from the Islamic point of view, such that it is accepted and he is regarded as a Muslim, deserving to enter the House of Happiness. A stage below this is insufficient. But what about a higher stage? So much the better! man should try to attain it. The more he advances the more perfect he becomes in his monotheism. As a matter of fact, man's procession of perfection advances towards at-Tawhid, and the evaluation of a man's merits in accordance with the Islamic criterions is measured in proportion to the degree of his monotheism.

Here someone may ask: Does each one of the said stages of at-Tawhid provide a part of our happiness and secure a stage of our perfection and piety, or are those monotheistic concepts like a mixture which if it contained all the ingredients it would be effective, and if not it would be as if it did not exist at all?

In more explicit terms: suppose a person accepts at-Tawhid in creation, but he does not accept at-Tawhid in Lordship. When this person is compared with another person who accepts none of these two concepts, can we say that these two are, as regards perfection and piety, in two different stages, such as to say this one gets 10 degrees and the other gets 20 degrees? Or by acquiring all the stages of at-Tawhid one has, actually, just started the process, and is it here that the effects appear, whereas before reaching this stage there would be no effect whatsoever? It occurs to one that these are almost a successive series of stages, each of which is relatively effective. That is, if somebody denies the existence of Allah, even as the Necessary Being, he will be extremely low. The one who admits that Allah is the Necessary Being has found a part of the truth and ascended a step towards perfection. He is better than the one who denies it; and so on until comes to accept at-Tawhid in Divinity. What is the answer to this question?

The Qur'an says that it is not true that the one who accepts some aspects of at-Tawhid is better than the one who accepts none of them, i.e. if one accepts only the first four stages of at-Tawhid will be regarded as if one accepts none of them - a fact which appears to us strange, at first glance. An explicit example of this in the Qur'an is the disbelief of Iblis (Satan). It is not our concern to discuss whether Iblis is a real creature or a legendary one, or whether he is separate from man or an inseparable dimension of him. We, however, believe that Iblis is a separate creature who has a real existence outside man, and who lives for a long period, all of which is not our concern now.

At any rate, the episode of Iblis, which is repeated in the Qur'an several times, is not a mere useless legend.

The Qur'an's repetition and insistence upon it is but for us to take a lesson from it. Did Iblis believe ill Allah's creation? The Qur'an says that when Allah asked Iblis why didn't he fall down in obeisance to Adam, he replied: "...You had created me of fire, while You created him of clay. I am better than him",[^52] why should he make obeisance to him? In this conversation there is no denial of Allah's creation, on the contrary, it declares that He is the Creator of both of them. Satan admits that Allah is the Creator of the world, including Satan and the human beings. So, he did believe in Allah's power of creation, but what about Allah's Lordship? He addressed Allah, saying: "My Lord! Because you have sent me astray, I shall entice them..."[^53] Allah is addressed as "Lord", which means that he believed in Allah's Lordship, too. He also believed in the Day of Resurrection, as he says: "...My Lord! Then respite me till the time when they are resurrected."[^54] This he asked after that Allah had cursed him for his disobedience. He asked Allah to lengthen his life till the Day of Judgement so as to instigate them and deviate them from the right path.

Therefore, if each of these beliefs was individually sufficient to be regarded as a virtue and perfection, he should have had as many virtues and perfections, since he believed in Allah's Existence, Oneness, Creation, Lordship and in the Resurrection.

In "Nahjul-Balaghah", by Imam 'Ali (A.S.) we read about Iblis that: "He had worshipped Allah for six thousand years, whether counted by the years of this world or of the next world is unknown."[^55]

Now let us suppose that Iblis had worshipped Allah for six thousand years before the creation of Adam - and the worship of six thousand years is not a trivial thing - what shortcomings did Iblis have? He was short of obedience. He should have obeyed what Allah had ordered him to do. It is Allah's right to be obeyed without dispute. When He commands He must be obeyed. All existence is His; so, self-assertion before Him is pointless, since one has to accept Allah's legislative Lordship and to obey Him unquestionably. Nobody else is to be obeyed in this manner. But Satan disputes with Allah, meaning to say to Allah: "This order of Yours is irrelevant- [we seek Allah's refuge!] - if someone has to bow down before someone else, the former must be lower in position than the latter, whereas my position is higher than that of Adam. It is Adam who should make obeisance before me. So, You have issued a groundless order. You have no right to tell me to bow to Adam." Nowhere in the Qur'an, nor in any Divine Book and any traditional narrative, it was said that Iblis had committed any error except this one which is mentioned with its psychological preliminaries. This was the cause of Satan's downfall - he refused to obey Allah's order. The reason for his refusal is, of course, conceit and envy. He envied Adam. These are psychological causes. But what had practically caused Satan's downfall was Allah's verdict: "And My curse is on You to the Day of Judgement"[^56], and on that day it will be said: "That I will indeed fill Hell with you and with those who follow you, all.

"[^57] That is, the forerunner of the people of Hell is Iblis, while the others follow him. Allah had pledged that He would fill hell with Satan and his followers. If we suppose that whoever accepts a stage of at-Tawhid must be superior and more honoured than the one who does not accept it, then Iblis must be much superior to the one who denies even the existence of Allah, such as a person who does not believe in any deity lives a few years in this world .and perhaps no evil deed is committed by him, and yet, Iblis, who worshipped Allah for six thousand years and believed in several aspects of at-Tawhid, is placed at the head of the Hell-dwellers, that is, he is confined to the lowest stratum of Hell.

Maybe Iblis had partners. There may be human Satans even, and not better than him, but none of them may be benefitted by whatever worshipping he had done, since he did not reach the necessary limit of at-Tawhid, such as the mixture which lacks one of its essential ingredients. This mixture can benefit only when all its ingredients are added. A mixture lacking an essential part may even be harmful. In medicine, if a compound lacked a particular material, it may not only be useless, but it may also be harmful. Similarly, the collection of the monotheistic beliefs is a mixture effective in bringing about man's happiness, and entering him in Allah's Mercy and His Paradise. If it lacks any of its elements it will be ineffective.

We know that if a Muslim denies a necessary Islamic precept mentioned in the Qur'an he is regarded as an apostate; that is, he has forsaken his religion. We remember that the Imam [late Ayatullah Ruhullah Al-Khumayni, the Founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran] some time ago said that, whoever regards the [Islamic] Penalty Bill as inhumane will be an apostate, his wife will be haram [illegal] to him, his penalty will be death, killing him will be lawful and his property will be distributed among his heirs. Why? Does he deny the existence of Allah, or the Prophet? Does he say that there will be no Judgement Day? No, he denies none of these. He even performs his salats and fasts. He only says that that "Bill, , is inhumane and unfair. Why should he be regarded as an apostate? He has so many [Islamic] beliefs. He serves so much. Why should he become lower even than the one who denies Allah? Is it because he does not attain to the accepted limit of at-Tawhid?

This shows as if some part of the mission of Muhammad (S.A.) were inadequate, or that Muhammad (S.A.) himself had - we seek Allah's refuge - badly conveyed Allah's message to the people, or Allah (W.S.A.R.) had badly expressed Himself, or badly legislated the laws. In any case, it is a denial of either the Message or the limit of at-Tawhid. The one who admits that the Prophet (S.A.) utters nothing out of himself and believes in the Message, by objecting to any of the Prophet's utterances, will actually be objecting to Allah i.e. he objects: why did Allah, for example, legislate the Penalty Code?

It is not without reason that the episode of Satan is so much stressed. We must understand it. We cannot be Muslims unless we submit to Allah's commands. If I say: "I accept this only when I understand its reasonable proof, but I'll leave it if I do not understand it", I will be following my reason. Of course, the Islamic precepts have their rational evidences and they are related to the good and the bad. But it is different to say: "I will not accept them unless I know what good there is in them", and to say: "There is no precept without an interest, though I do not know it."

Is there anything minus Allah? Whatever we have is from Him, so how can we say before Allah: "You are One and I am one, You will and I will." Who are we? What do we have from ourselves? When I say: "Allah said so in the Qur'an, but I think it would have been better if He had said so," is as if I say: "I have a sense which Allah does not have." Thus, in this sense you are a god, and the taste is not from Allah. If it is, then Allah is its originator. If you understand something which Allah does not, then you, in this understanding of yours, are the god of your understanding, since you did get it from Allah!

Islam means "submission", resignation to the will of Allah. So, how can it be possible for somebody to be a Muslim and nevertheless questions Allah about His commands, and shows off his own opinion, and says: "This precept is an insult to the women's dignity, that one is inhumane", and things like that? This is why the Imam [Khumayni] said that the penalty for such a person is death, he must be killed, because he lacks the foundation of Islam in himself. This, however, is a religious decree and is backed by particular proofs. This precept is explained according to the Islamic point of view, as denying a necessary precept means denying the Divine Legislative Lordship. The parable of this person is like the parable of Iblis. If he worships for a thousand years and fights for Islam for a thousand years, but he denies a single necessary precept which is stated in the Qur'an, killing him will be lawful, his wife will be haram to him and his wealth will be distributed among his heirs, as it will no longer be his. Thus, there is a limit, a norm, before Allah. To dispute these norms is not accepted in Islam.

Islam is submission. If it is sometimes recommended that one should be tough and self-assertive, the opposite is required before Allah. One is to be humble, powerless, helpless, modest and submissive before one's Lord. Those who think that Islam does not want man to be humble even before Allah have understood nothing of Islam.

Man, before Allah, must be the most humiliated, and he must show his humiliation before Him.

Man's perfection is in his being humble before Allah. No one should be self-assertive before Him. This is actual worship. Islam without worshipping means nothing, and no worship is possible without showing humility to Allah. So, how can it be said that Islam does not want man to be humble even before Allah? What does it want, then? Islam is nothing but this. Islam is submission (to Allah).

"It is enough for me as a pride to be a slave of Yours and it is enough for me as an honour to have You for a Lord!"[^58] Islam says: "Put your forehead, before Allah, on the soil, and your face, too", "And they fall down on their faces weeping, and it adds to their humility."[^59] If not, why, then, 'Ali (A.S.) used to cry and to humiliate himself before Allah? How can they say that Islam does not want us to show humiliation before Allah?

At any rate, the Qur'anic ayahs tell us that the agreeable limit or norm of the human perfection, i.e. the least standard acceptable to Islam from a worthy godly person is his accepting these aspects and manifestations of at-Tawhid. To be careless or indifferent to any one of them leads to man's downfall from the lowest stage of Islam. The highest stage of man's perfection comes after this one, as without passing through these stages, there would be no advancement on the road of perfection and human virtue endorsed by Islam and acceptable to it. All those aspects can be helpful. Originality belongs to at-Tawhid, while other virtues help man to progress upwards. That which has the originality is the connection between the heart and Allah, which is manifested in those beliefs.

To conclude what has been mentioned above: at-Tawhid means considering Allah to be One, as an Islamic principle. His Oneness is admitted in the following subjects:

In the necessity of His existence, and this necessity is exclusively in respect of Allah alone.
In Creation
In Genetic Lordship, i.e. the management of the world.
In the Legislative Lordship, i.e. giving laws, biddings and forbiddings, which are to be carried out undisputedly.
In worshipping and deity, i.e. no creature deserves worshipping except Allah.

At this point one will be representing the concept of "La ilaha illallah", there is no god but Allah, which is the first stage of Islam, without which Islam cannot be fulfilled. Then, there are other stages of at-Tawhid, which can be attained to by way of knowledge and deeds on the road to perfection: at-Tawhid in seeking help and reliance, at-Tawhid in fear and hope, at-Tawhid in love, and so on until one reaches the highest stage of at-Tawhid, that is at-Tawhid in His "independent existence". The independent existence is exclusively His. All the affairs of existence are from Him - this must become a visualized fact, not just a mental concept attained to by mental and philosophical reasoning. Whoever reaches this stage will be a perfect monotheist. Such a person will have no independent relation except with Allah: "You are the One Who made the lights shine in the hearts of Your friends so that they could know You and admit your Oneness; and You are the One Who removed the others from the hearts of those who love You so that they could love no one save You."[^60]

The connection between at-Tawhid and the genetic guardianship raises a question: Having admitted that Allah is One as the Necessary Being, the Creator and Lord, should we, consequently, deprive all other creatures of any kind of effect in respect to creation and management, and if we attribute to them some effect would it be a sort of polytheism?

Or what is meant by at-Tawhid is not this, as others can also create, raise the dead and practise management, but only with permission of Allah. For example, there are some ayahs concerning Jesus (A.S.), in which certain things are mentioned. Allah, addressing Jesus (A.S.) says: "...and you create out of clay the shape of a bird by My permission, then you blow into it and it becomes a bird by My permission, and you heal the blind and the leprous by My permission, and you bring forth the dead by My permission..."[^61]

So, Jesus (A.S.), son of Mary did not only cure the sick, but raised the dead to life, and even more than that - he could turn a handful of clay into the shape of a bird, breathe into it, and it flew away a full real bird by Allah's permission. Those were the miracles which Jesus (A.S.) showed to the people to prove his prophethood.

In another ayah he himself says: "I bring the dead to life by Allah's permission."[^62] Some of the commentators who deny miracles and try to explain them according to the laws of nature, believe that Jesus's curing of the sick was a kind of genius in the science of medicine, alleging that Jesus (A.S.) was a very clever physician who could very easily cure the sick, which used to be regarded as a miracle. Otherwise there was nothing unnatural about it. Then, when they reached this part of the ayah "...and you bring forth the dead", they said that "to bring forth" referred to disentombing the dead bodies, which Jesus (A.S.) did! This is, of course, a ridiculous thing that only an insane can utter. Why should Allah hold Jesus (A.S.) under obligation for telling him , he was the one who dug the dead bodies out of their graves? Was it a pride for him to do so? Yet, Jesus (A.S.) himself said in another ayah: "I bring the dead to life".

At any case, these comments are symptoms of certain ailments which usually attack those who assume to be Muslims. They are motivated by their pro-Western tendencies and try to show off their fake scholarship, or whatever you may call it. It is their weak faith which causes them to think that all laws of the world are only the natural ones. They deny all metaphysical rules governing nature, and thus, whatever happens in the world must be in conformity with the natural laws. Consequently, to them, there can be no miracles and no extraordinary accomplishments. Therefore, in their efforts to combine their false beliefs with those ayahs which they pretend to accept and believe in, they fall into contradictory statements and find themselves in straits, and hence such absurd and childish talks.

The Qur'an definitely says that Jesus (A.S.) did bring to life dead people, create living creatures and cure acute diseases, and , yet he was one of Allah's servants. Actually, this was the very cause which made some of his apostles and followers exaggerate his position and say that he was the son of Allah, or even he was Allah Himself. Those beliefs are positively reputed by the Qur'an: "...and say not: Three. Desist, it is better for you. Allah is only One God..."[^63] At the same time it confirms that Jesus (A.S.) did practise those acts, by Allah's permission. Once again we repeat the said ayah for a more serious consideration: "... and you create out of clay the shape of a bird by My permission, then you blow into it and it becomes a bird by My permission, and heal the blind and the leprous by My permission, and you bring forth the dead by My permission..." It should have been enough to use "by My permission" only once for all those achievements of Jesus (A.S.). However, such achievements are regarded as polytheism only when one thinks that they had been achieved independently and without Allah's permission. But if one believes that Allah may grant somebody a power enabling him to affect the world of nature and bring about phenomena contrary to the accepted laws of nature, this belief, besides not being polytheism at all, it is, actually, the very monotheism itself, and to deny it is to deny the Qur'an, the message of the Prophet (S.A.) and at-Tawhid in its complete tenets.

We have, thus, to believe that such performances can possibly be achieved by other than Allah, but by Allah, s permission. Now, what is the nature of this permission? It is what is known in our culture as "the Genetic Guardianship", and whether the holy Prophet (A.S.) and the infallible Imams (A.S.) possess this "genetic guardianship" or not.

The Opinion Denying Genetic Guardianship

Some of the brethren of the Sunni sects think that such a belief is polytheistic, that is, if a person believes that the Prophet (S.A.) possessed "Genectic Guardianship", i.e. he could bring to life the dead or cure the sick, he is a polytheist, because such acts are only done by Allah. Consequently, they regard other Muslim sects, who make more than 95% of the Muslims, to be polytheists, including the Shi'ites who believe that the Prophet (S.A.) possessed "Genetic Guardianship".

Such accusations can be referred to as being ill-informed if partiality and political motives are excluded. The one who has read the Qur'an and those ayahs, too, how could one allow oneself to take such a belief as polytheism? The Qur'an itself says that Jesus (A.S.) did create, animate the dead and remedy the sick, so, how can these be regarded as polytheistic beliefs? Sometimes they add other unwise talk to that. They say that only the very instances stated in the Qur'an are not shirk (polytheism). But to ascribe them to persons not mentioned in the Qur'an, will be shirk. It is quite clear that this talk is groundless. If some act is shirk, then it is shirk even if the Qur'an does not mention it. Can the nature of monotheism be changed that which is shirk is shirk, disregarding what the others say. How is it possible that when the Qur'an says, addressing Jesus (A.S.): you created, you brought the dead to life, it is called Tawhid, but if it is not directly mentioned by the Qur'an, it is counted shirk?

This kind of immature viewpoint, which is spreading among many Muslims, is caused by economic and political factors. It is imposed by the force of money upon the poor people of the Islamic countries. It is now spreading throughout such countries as India, Pakistan and some Arab countries, whose majority of people are too poor to resist temptations of the Wahhabi money.

The connection between at-Tawhid and the "Legislative Guardianship"' in this respect, is similar to that of the "Legislative Lordship" . That is, by saying that no one but Allah has the right to legislate laws, to issue orders and to be unquestionably obeyed, we do not mean that no one else is to be obeyed in all cases, nor that no one has the right to issue orders in all cases. Actually, what is meant here is that no one has, independently, the right to issue orders on his own account, unless Allah Himself gives him the right to do so, in which case, to obey him would practically mean obeying Allah Himself.

The Qur'an confirms this by saying: "And We did not send any messenger but that he should be obeyed by Allah's permission..."[^64] So, to obey somebody by Allah's permission is, actually, to obey Allah. Such obedience not only does not contradict at-Tawhid, but is part and parcel of it. What contradicts Divine Legislative Lordship is to think that there are others, besides Allah, and diagonally, who have the right, like Him, to legislate laws, without depending upon Him, and regard obeying them is obligatory, like obeying Allah. This is real shirk. But to say that Allah had appointed some persons to see to people's affairs, to direct them and to bid them what to do and what not to do, and, at the same time, He ordered us to obey them - this is not shirk at all.

The said topics are referred to in the Qur'an: "Then those who manage the affair,"[^65] despite the fact that management is exclusively His, as: "Surely His is the creation and the command",[^66] and: "He manages the affair from the heaven to the earth..."[^67], yet, at the same time, He says: "Then those who manage the affair", no matter who they may be. (Most of the commentators believe that they are angels). At any case, there are others who, by the permission of Allah, practise some sort of managements, which are admitted by the Qur'an.

The Qur'an orders the people to obey the Prophet (S.A.): "...obey Allah and obey the Messenger and the authorized from among you... ."[^68]

They are to obey not only the Prophet (S.A.), but also his infallible successors, as was told by the Messenger (S.A.) himself that "the authorized from among you" were the 12 infallible Imams (A.S.). It goes without saying, then, that obeying the Messenger and the authorized also covers those who had, in particular or in general, been appointed by the Prophet (S.A.) or the Imam (A.S.).

When the Prophet appoints a governor to a certain region, the people there must obey him, and their obedience to him is, in fact, obedience to the Messenger himself. Likewise, obeying the Supreme Islamic Guardian who had been appointed by the "Imam of the Time" [the 12th Imam] to take care of the people's affairs during his Occultation, is obeying the Imam, and obeying the Imam is obeying Allah: "They are my Proof before you and I am the Proof of Allah" So, believing in the legislative guardianship of the Prophet (S.A.), the Imam and the related, including the great jurisprudents during the Occultation of the "Guardian of the Time" [the 12th Imam] not only does not contradict at-Tawhid, but it is one of at-Tawhid's affairs. That is, obeying Allah includes obeying Allah's Messenger, because He ordered us to obey him, and so on until we get to the jurisprudents. This explanation was necessary to be annexed to the case of at-Tawhid so as to remove some of the doubts cast on this matter by the ignorant and the prejudiced.

This case of at-Tawhid is exactly the same as that of ash-shafa'ah [intercession]. In the previous lesson we said that the idolaters of Mecca believed that the angels were the daughters of Allah we seek Allah's refuge! - and that Allah obliged them by granting them whatever they demanded, even if it was contrary to His will.

They used to say: "We worship them, and although we do not see them, we carve their statues. So, they made the idols and worshipped them so that their souls - being Allah's daughters - may cast a kind glance at their worshippers and interceded for them with Allah. Asked: "Why do you worship these idols?" the idolaters would say: "We do not worship them save that they may bring us nearer to Allah,"[^69] or: "They are our intercessors with Allah."[^70] This provoked the Wahhabis and others like them to consider the believers in intercession (ash-shafa'ah) to be, in some cases, polytheists.

As a matter of fact, the leader of the Wahhabis does believe that the Prophet (S.A.) will have the privilege of intercession on the Resurrection Day. But as to the others, including the Imams of the Shi'ah, and especially if such interceding expands to cover worldly materials, they regard it to be polytheism. There are people who are more Catholic than the Pope. They allege that the very idea of there being an intercession is a mere falsity, and that it actually means leadership, guidance and teaching, and nothing else. They even surpassed the Wahhabis. They say that "intercession" is shirk, and it is a belief like that of the idolaters in respect of the idols. But the Qur'an itself says that "intercession" is accepted from the angels, the prophets and the godly men, and it is with the permission of Allah, on the one hand, and is acceptable only from particular people in accordance with their special merits and virtues, on the other. It is accepted under particular disciplines, and never on nepotism or arbitrarily. Actually, this in itself is one of the Divine laws. We hope to be able later on to expand on this subject a little more.

The Qur'an says: ..."Who is he who can intercede with Him except by His permission..."[^71] The ayah negates the "independent intercession" i.e. to impose one's own will on Allah's - as the idolaters used to say - and say to Him: Your will is to throw this person in Hell, but since we are bashful of one another, you must take him to paradise. And, on the basis of this reciprocal bashfulness, and as Allah attaches importance to such people, says: I shall not let you down, and will send him to paradise. This is shirk, because it is an independent intercession. But if Allah himself enjoins such a law and appoints certain persons allowed, in certain occasions, to intercede and invoke Allah's mercy for others, even before asking it for their own benefit according to their merits this is confirmed by the Qur'an. Allah's mercies are of His bounties. He can bestow His mercy upon some of His creatures, or upon all of them even more than they deserve. But for such grants He had assigned special channels and special regulations. Those who directly receive their rewards in proportion to their deeds only, are treated in a certain way.

But there are persons who, through certain deeds, deserve to receive indirect Divine favours, more than their due. For example, there are people who eat only their bread, and there are others who are worthy of being invited as guests, too. But they have to acquire the merit of deserving to be guests, as no one will be invited without a cause or a reason. The Prophet (S.A.), the infallible Imams (A.S.) and the godly people have the right to invite guests on the Day of Resurrection, but they do not invite everybody to be their guest. At any rate, the Qur'an says: "...and they do not intercede except for him whom He approves...,"[^72] This means that there are certain conditions, approved by Allah, for one to get their intercession. Many ayahs in the Qur'an go this way, i.e. basing the intercession on Allah's permission, on the one hand , and limiting its effect to those who have won Allah's approval, on the other.

Thus, believing in intercession not only does not contradict at-Tawhid, but is, actually, a part of it.