Refutation of the Mu'tazilah and the Jabriyyah regarding divine decree and clarification of the meaning of divine decree.

The Shaykh : People today deny this book and imagine something else, which is what the Mu'tazilah fell into: that the divine decree is the divine knowledge, whereas the decree is not the divine knowledge, just as writing is not. The word "decree" (qadar) is derived from "estimation" (taqdir), meaning the detailing of every thing and placing it in its appropriate place. So the divine decree is the action of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, but according to the eternal divine knowledge. Likewise, the writing: everything was written in the Preserved Tablet, as came in the authentic hadith when Allah created the pen . This is the belief of all Muslims, except the Mu'tazilah who say there is no decree and no writing; so it is not only the divine knowledge. The truth is that when they believe in the divine knowledge on one hand, it places them within the circle of Islam, but on the other hand, they exit from faith, as we mentioned earlier, partially, by their denial of the divine estimation, the divine inscription, and the divine writing. But among the wonders of their minds is that they did not benefit at all from the negation (ta'til) of these texts, which they intended by this negation to free the masses of the Jabriyyah from compulsion. They did not benefit at all. Why? Because what Allah decreed is according to His knowledge, and because what Allah wrote is according to His knowledge. So, in their claim, compulsion (jabr) still remains attached to this created human being. If we now remove from our minds, as the Mu'tazilah want, no writing and no decree, well, did it not precede in the knowledge of Allah that so-and-so is from the people of the Fire, for example, that Iblis is in the lowest depth of the Fire? Yes, it preceded in the knowledge of Allah. Well, can he not do that? The same doubt they want to raise against the people of the Sunnah when they affirm the decree and the writing is also raised against them, because the writing does not add more than what is in the divine knowledge, without likening (tashbih) or likening. A person among us has an idea, he comes and writes it down. This writing did not add to what was in his mind and intellect, so it remains this thought. What did it bring of something new? Why does one of us write now to clarify to people the truth that is in his mind? Without likening, our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, wanted to clarify what preceded in His knowledge, so He decreed every thing and wrote every thing, and that is to affirm that Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is All-Powerful over every thing. So the answer to refuting the doubt of compulsion is not by denying the writing and the decree, but by observing one thing, which is to study the nature of this human being whom our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, created in the best form. Is he truly compelled, or in common expression, driven and not choosing? The answer is that it is not correct to say, as they say, that the human being is driven and not choosing, nor is it correct to say the opposite, that the human being is choosing and not driven. Rather, we say that sometimes he is driven, i.e., compelled, and sometimes he is choosing, i.e., selecting. So we do not make a general statement, neither negative nor positive. We do not say, as the common people say, "driven and not choosing," nor the opposite, to spite the common people, saying "no, he is choosing and not driven." Because reality testifies that the human being is sometimes driven and sometimes choosing. The proof is when a human being is in any matter, and it is observed that he was compelled, driven by another, and that is the Lord of the Worlds, and he was not choosing. Is he responsible before Allah, Blessed and Exalted? The answer is no responsibility. Why? Because it is established by writing, by the Sunnah, and by reason that responsibility and compulsion do not coexist. As the wretched Jabri described his Lord, Mighty and Majestic, with what is not correct to describe a tyrant, oppressive, and unjust. He said about Allah, describing the relationship of the servant with his Lord: "He threw him in the sea bound, then said to him: Beware, beware of being wet by the water." Is this how the human being is with the Lord of mankind? Far be it from Allah, Mighty and Majestic. He said in the clear Qur'an: . The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: , and other such texts. So the human being has a will and a choice. If this will is removed from him, the obligation is lifted from him. And if this will and this choice are established, the obligation follows behind it. So the human being is sometimes driven and sometimes choosing. The one who kills a person by mistake is driven. He threw at a bird, threw at a gazelle, threw at a rabbit, the bullet went and hit behind the clod of earth a farmer working in the field. This is killing by mistake. The Lord of the Worlds does not say to this human being: Why did you kill so-and-so? Because he was not choosing. And on the contrary, the one who intends to kill so-and-so, takes the means, resolves to kill him, and kills him, as they say today in the language of lawyers, with prior intent and design. Yes?

The questioner : Persistence and premeditation.

The Shaykh : Is this equal to that? No, they are not equal. For example, this one, the Lord of the Worlds will say to him: Why did you kill so-and-so? And why did you resolve to kill him? And He will account him with a very severe account. So all the texts of the Shari'ah, in addition to sound innate reason, both judge together that the human being is sometimes choosing and sometimes compelled. When the Jabri comes and says there is no decree, how can there be no decree, my brother? This one who was forced to kill a person by mistake, this is the decree. But where is the one who killed the person with his will and prior intent? This is also by decree. But what I intended with these examples to say is: Allah wrote for so-and-so thus in the Preserved Tablet, according to the divine knowledge. Allah wrote for Iblis that he would be in the lowest of the lowest, in the lowest depth of the Fire. Why? Because he is commanded to prostrate and he is able to, so he is arrogant against the command of his Lord and says, attributing injustice to Allah: . So he does not prostrate, and he is able to prostrate. So he is written among the people of the Fire, indeed the most wretched of the people of the Fire. But on the contrary, now return to the issue of the Mu'tazilah: the one who died in the North Pole or the South Pole and did not reach, did not hear anything called the religion of Islam, or a person named Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah, the Prophet of Islam, did not reach his ear. So he lived worshipping the idols that the people of the first age of ignorance used to worship. Is it said to him on the Day of Resurrection: Why did you disbelieve? No. Allah the Exalted said: . This is a very broad door. And so I do not want to go far from the question. The Mu'tazilah and all the misguided sects, if they are misguided, they are on the same path, and they remain with the Muslims performing the religious obligations. They are misguided, no doubt, but we do not take them out of the circle of Islam except after establishing the proof against them. If the proof is established against them, then there are two matters: one matter relates to the Lord of the Worlds, and we do not know what will be the outcome of his matter with Allah. And one matter relates to the ruler of the Muslims. The ruler of the Muslims here shows the importance of ruling with Islam. This person is brought to him, and some of the scholars of the Muslims are brought, and they establish the proof against him. If he persists in his misguidance after the proof of Allah has become clear to him, they kill him for apostasy. They kill him for apostasy because he truly disbelieved and the proof was established against him. As for a person who was not given such an opportunity for the proof to be established against him, we are content, especially regarding the past Mu'tazilah, Khawarij, Jahmiyyah, Murji'ah, and so on. We say their matter is left to Allah. Whoever Allah, Mighty and Majestic, knows that he was arrogant and denied, then Hell is sufficient for him. And whoever Allah, Mighty and Majestic, knows that he did not deny anything and he believes in the truth of the matter, this one is not accounted with the account of the disbelievers. It is permissible that he is accounted for having fallen short, not having taken the path that leads to knowing the truth. So at that time, our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, is his accountant. As for us, we do not take a Muslim out of the circle of Islam, no matter how misguided he is, except after establishing the proof. This is another answer, another answer.