A Case Inbetween Two Concerns
Chapter One : Historical Inevitability, Universal Inevitability
In the course of the philosophical history of reason we come across two theories that set out from inevitability as a start point.
The first of which; concerns man’s behaviour, in particular, individual and social behaviour.
The other pertains to the universal system as a whole. The first theory tends to believe in the inevitability of man’s behaviour retarding his will and negating its role ever in his behaviour.
The second theory tends to assert inevitability in the universal system as a whole, claiming that the entire universe moves within an accurate system according to the law of casualty. This system runs within a serial chain, each one of its links is connected to the prior and the following one within some inevitable system that does not change or drop behind, and nobody’s will ever may interfere to shift it.
If we presume that we have found the key links in this series of the general universal system, succeeding to read the cardinal order of these links that keep the system in hold; then we shall be able to foretell all events in the universe right to its last day.
Both theories run through each of the two eminent trends of thought, the divine doctrine and the material one.
Some of those who believe that inevitability controls man’s behaviour and history, do believe in Allah the Sublime, and they attribute this inevitability to Him.
Others who belong to the opposite direction (the material trend) reach to the same conclusion on the grounds of casualty law, or the dialectical system of thought.
Thus both trends assert that both, mans behaviour and his history are inevitable.
The second inevitability (the universal) in its turn does not concern this party or that exclusively; it is quite possible that both materialists and religious may adhere to it.
The Jews are one of the religious groups that tend to follow the trend of the universal inevitability. The Sublime said:
[The Jews said: Allah’s hand is fettered. Be their hands fettered and they be cursed for what they uttered] Al Maidah v. 64.
A wide sect of Muslims that is called (Al Ashairah) as well tends to believe that man’s behaviour is inevitable.
The Marxists as a sect from the materialists believe that this inevitability governs man’s history, (calling it – by their terminology – the universal necessity. Translator)
The Negative Results of These Two Inevitabilities
These two inevitabilities lead to negative results in man’s history of thought, they also lead to negative results in man’s political history, for they will necessarily lead to the presumption that there is a compulsory system in the universe; a system that can never be adjusted changed or shifted. And interpretation as such connotes retarding the potency of the will of Allah the Sublime, expelling the domination of His sovereignty over the universal system. This applies to the universal inevitability respectively.
The definite result that the inevitability in man’s behaviour and history brings about is the belief in suspending man’s will.
Both these dangerous results are necessarily produced by these two inevitabilities.
The Political Misuse of the Historical Inevitability:
The rulers and regimes have widely politically exploited both inevitabilities.
Adhering to behavioural and historical inevitability suspends man’s active role and will to change his circumstances of living and his political history, turning him from an active impressive element who can influence the movement of history and change his social circumstances of living into a character floating in the current of history and life, running wherever this current runs.
Such a kind of thinking usually serves the ends of oppressive political regimes. For, in a social media that thus adheres to fatalism, inevitability and determinism, any apparent opposition for the political regime may hardly show.
Therefore the theory of historical inevitability often meets approval and support from the politically oppressive regimes. The rulers encourage such thought tendencies towards destiny and fate to keep on the safe side from people’s rage, rebellion and objections. For there is no way for rage, rebellion and objections as long as all oppression and blood shed are predestined and designed by Allah, and no man has any power or right to change and adjust them!
(Benou Aumyah), Behavioral and Historical Inevitability
It became well known that (Benou Aumyah) used to adopt the doctrine of determinism to interpret history and man’s behaviour, instructing people that their injustice, oppression, suppression, Muslim’s treasury looting… etc, are predestined by Allah the Sublime’s inevitable destiny which nobody may protest against and none may resist.
(Al Hassan Al Bassry) had a tendency to contradict them in the matter of (destiny) believing that people are free to decide their destiny and Allah the Sublime does note inevitably impose their destiny on them; (Al Hassan Al Bassry) sometimes used to propagate this opinion of his, so some people frightened him of the authority (Al Sultan).
Ibn Sa’ad in (Al Tabaquat) quotes (Ayoob):
(Several times I discussed destiny with (Al Hassan), then I threatened him by the authorities, so he said: I shall never say anything about that again.)
At the age of (Al Hassan Al Bassry) the authority that reigned was (Benou Aumyah). A fact that inspires us to conclude, they used to consolidate the theory of behavioral and historical inevitability extending it to the extremes of terrorism and suppression.
Strange enough, the advocates of polytheism used to justify their polytheism and idolatry by this inevitability!
The Sublime – mouthpiecing them – says:
[And these pagans have said: if it had not been the will of ArRahman we would not worship these idols they say these out of ignorance; they say nothing but lies.] Az Zukhruf v. 20.