Thursday, May 14, 2009

Mankind made in the image of Allah?

Islamic Adam and Eve
Not exactly your garden variety . . .
Manafi al-Hayawan (منافع الحيوان: Usefulness of Animals)
From Maragheh in Mongol Iran, 1294-99
(Image from Wikipedia)

Adam and Eve in this Muslim painting look rather different from the Adam and Eve usually seen in Western paintings. Eve in particular calls to mind images of the Buddha from Central Asia, which undoubtedly shows the influence of some tradition of painting from outside Islam itself.

Despite differences from the Western depictions of Adam and Eve, and despite what I've long heard and even accepted about Allah having no image and Islam rejecting the Jewish and Christian view of human beings being made in God's image, I have just learned that Islam does have traditions about man being made in the image of Allah.

I sometimes do wild Google searches, and yesterday, I was thinking about an article that I read over ten years ago about an aboriginal tribe of northern Australia that had some contact with traders from Indonesia prior to British colonization. This tribe had apparently learned something of the the traders' religion, and in the tribe's own tradition drew an image of Allah, perhaps the only one ever made (or so the article speculated). I was interested in finding that article and so performed the search that led to today's post.

I should interject that I've long held that the Qur'an's suras telling of Allah commanding the angels to bow down to the newly created Adam (7.11; 15.31-32; 38.74-75) presuppose that Adam was made in Allah's image (else why the command to bow down?). However, since I had been told, and had also read, that Islam rejects the belief that mankind was made in the image of Allah -- for Allah is totally other than anything created -- then I did not expect to find any Muslim acceptance of the so-called Imago Dei. But I found precisely this in a commentary on a hadith stating that "Allah created Adam in His image" -- and I have pasted the entire discussion by someone named Madarijas-Salikeen:
Commentary on the hadeeth, "Allaah created Adam in His image"

Question: When Prophet says "Allah created Adam in his image" what does "his image" refer to and how should we understand it?.

Answer: Praise be to Allaah.

Al-Bukhaari (6227) and Muslim (2841) narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Allaah created Adam in His image, and he was sixty cubits tall. When he created him he said, 'Go and greet that group of angels who are sitting and listen to how they greet you, for that will be your greeting and the greeting of your descendents.' So he said, 'Al-salaamu 'alaykum (peace be upon you),' and they said, 'Al-salaamu 'alayka wa rahmat-Allaah (Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allaah).' So they added (the words) 'wa rahmat-Allaah.' Everyone who enters Paradise will be in the form of Adam, but mankind continued to grow shorter until now."

Muslim (2612) narrated that Abu Hurayrah said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "When any one of fights his brother, let him avoid the face, for Allaah created Adam in His image."

Ibn Abi 'Aasim narrated in al-Sunnah (517) that Ibn 'Umar said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not say 'May Allaah deform your face' [a form of cursing in Arabic], for the son of Adam was created in the image of the Most Merciful." Shaykh 'Abd-Allaah ibn al-Ghunaymaan (may Allaah preserve him) said: "This hadeeth is saheeh and was classed as such by the imams and by Imam Ahmad and Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh. Those who classed it as da'eef have no evidence, except for the view of Ibn Khuzaymah, but those who classed it as saheeh are more knowledgeable than him.
I should interject here that there exist four categories of hadith based upon the hadith's isnad (chain of narrators): sahih (sound), hasan (good), da'if (weak), and maudu' (fabricated, forged). Apparently, there was a dispute over this hadith about Adam being created in the image of Allah (possibly due to Allah's utter otherness in Islamic theology?). But to return to Madarijas-Salikeen's discussion:
Ibn Abi 'Aasim also narrated (516) that Abu Hurayrah said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "When any one of you fights let him avoid the face, for Allaah created Adam in the image of His Face." Shaykh al-Albaani said: its isnaad is saheeh.

These two hadeeth indicate that the pronoun in the phrase "in His image" refers to Allaah, may He be glorified.

Al-Tirmidhi (3234) narrated from Ibn 'Abbaas that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "My Lord came to me in the most beautiful image and said, 'O Muhammad.' I said, 'Here I am at Your service, my Lord.' He said, 'What are the chiefs (angels) on high disputing about . . .'" Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.

According to the lengthy hadeeth about intercession, it says, ". . . then the Compeller (al-Jabbaar) will come to then in an image different than the image in which they saw Him the first time . . ." Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 7440; Muslim, 182.

From these ahaadeeth we learn that it is proven that Allaah has an image (soorah in Arabic), in a manner that befits Him, may He be glorified and exalted. His image is one of His attributes which cannot be likened to the attributes of created beings, just as His essence cannot be likened to their essence.
Again, I interject. Here, Madarijas-Salikeen appeals to Islamic orthodoxy in such a way as to interpret "image" in a sense other than its usual meaning, for if Allah's image is one of his 'attributes' and if Allah's attributes cannot be likened to attributes of created beings, then Madarijas-Salikeen is effectively denying that Adam was made in Allah's image, for an image means a likeness. Obviously, the argument in sophisticated Islamic commentary would be rather complex and would explicate the nuances of the Arabic term for "image" . . . but ultimately, the hadith is rendered meaningless if "image" means "not in the likeness of." Madarijas-Salikeen deals with this very issue in a typical way by denying that image implies any sort of likeness. The point seems to be that a likeness would have to be exact, whereas an image is not exact. The problem that I see here is that even an image implies resemblance, even if one is not speaking of physical resemblance. The term "image" is thus emptied of meaning, as we shall see when Ibn Qutaybah says that "Allaah" having an "image" is accepted by Muslims along with Allah's other attributes, "but we do not discuss how any of them are":
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: "The word soorah (image) in this hadeeth is like all the other names and attributes narrated (in the texts) where the words used may also be applied to created beings, in a limited manner. When these words are applied to Allaah, they carry a unique meaning, such as al-'Aleem (All Knowing), al-Qadeer (All-Powerful), al-Raheem (Most Merciful), al-Samee' (All Hearing), al-Baseer (All-Seeing), and such as His creating with His hands, rising above the Throne, etc." Naqd al-Ta'sees, 3/396

Everything that exists must inevitably have a form or image. Shaykh al-Islam said: "Just as everything that exists must have attributes that, so too everything that exists by itself must have a form or image. It is impossible for something that exists by itself not to have a form or image."

And he said: "There was no dispute among the salaf of the first three generations that the pronoun in the hadeeth refers to Allaah, and it is narrated through many isnaads from many of the Sahaabah. The contexts of the ahaadeeth all indicate that . . . but when al-Jahamiyyah became widespread in the third century AH, a group began to say that the pronoun refers to something other than Allaah, and this was transmitted from a group of scholars who are known to have knowledge and to follow the Sunnah in most of their affairs, such as Abu Thawr, Ibn Khuzaymah, Abu'l-Shaykh al-Asfahaani and others. Hence they were denounced by the imams of Islam and other Sunni scholars."

Naqd al-Ta'sees, 3/202

Ibn Qutaybah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: "That Allaah should have an image is no stranger than His having two hands, fingers or eyes. Rather those are readily accepted because they are mentioned in the Qur'aan, but this idea (image or form) is regarded as strange because it is not mentioned in the Qur'aan. But we believe in them all, but we do not discuss how any of them are."

Ta'weel Mukhtalif al-Hadeeth, p. 221

Shaykh al-Ghunaymaan said: "Thus it is clear that the form or image is like all the other divine attributes. Any attribute which Allaah has affirmed in the Revelation, we must affirm it and believe in it."

Sharh Kitaab al-Tawheed min Saheeh al-Bukhaari, 2/41

Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked: There is a hadeeth narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in which he forbids saying "May Allaah deform your face", and says that Allaah created Adam in His image. What is the correct belief with regard to this hadeeth?

He replied:

This hadeeth is proven from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), in which he said: "If any one of you strikes (another), let him avoid the face, for Allaah created Adam in His image." According to another version: "In the image of the Most Merciful." This does not imply resemblance or likeness.

What is meant, according to the scholars, is that Allaah created Adam with the ability to hear and see, and to speak when he wants. These are also attributes of Allaah, for He is All-Hearing, All-Seeing, and He speaks when He wants, and He has a Face, may He be glorified and exalted.

But it does not mean that there is any resemblance or likeness. Rather the image of Allaah is different from that of created beings. What is meant is that He is All-Hearing, All-Seeing, and He speaks when He wants, and He created Adam also able to hear and see, with a face and hands and feet. But man’s hearing is not like Allaah's hearing, his seeing is not like Allaah's seeing, his speaking is not like Allaah's speaking. Rather Allaah has attributes that befit His majesty and might, and man has attributes that befit him, attributes that are finite and imperfect, whereas the attributes of Allaah are perfect, with no shortcomings, infinite and without end. Hence Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

"There is nothing like Him, and He is the All‑Hearer, the All‑Seer" [al-Shoora 42:11]

"And there is none co-equal or comparable unto Him" [al-Ikhlaas 112:4]

So it is not permissible to strike the face or say "May Allaah deform your face".

End quote. Majmoo' Fataawa al-Shaykh, 4/226

Another thing that will help to explain the meaning of this hadeeth is the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): "The first group to enter Paradise will be in the image of the moon (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3245; Muslim, 2834." What the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) meant here is that the first group will be in human form, but because of their purity, beauty and brightness of face they will look like the moon, so they are likened to the moon, but without resembling it. So just because a thing is said to be in the image of a thing it does not mean that it is like it in all aspects.

The Prophet's words, "Adam was created in His image" means that Allaah created Adam in His image, for He has a face, an eye, a hand, and a foot, and Adam had a face, an eye, a hand, and a foot . . . but that does not mean that these things are exactly the same. There is some similarity, but it is not exactly the same. Similarly the first group to enter Paradise are likened to the moon, but they are not exactly the same. This confirms the view of Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jamaa'ah, who say that none of the attributes of Allaah can be likened to the attributes of created beings, without distorting or misinterpreting, or discussing how or likening Him to His creation.

See Sharh al-'Aqeedah al-Waasitah by Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Uthaymeen, 1/107, 293.

For more information, see: Sharh Kitaab al-Tawheed min Saheeh al-Bukhaari by Shaykh al-Ghunaymaan, 2/33-98, in which he quotes at length from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him), refuting the misinterpretation of this hadeeth by ahl al-kalaam and those who agreed with them.

And Allaah knows best.
Well, I have certainly learned a great deal from this, namely, that Adam was made in Allah's image but that "image of Allah" in Islamic orthodoxy is emptied of any meaning that Muslims can understand.

There seems to be a type of 'agnosticism' at the core of Islam, an acceptance that nothing can be truly known about Allah. One can only submit to the Qur'anic revelation, for Allah is so utterly beyond human categories that one cannot reason about Him . . . which returns us to the issue that got Pope Benedict XVI in trouble in Regensburg.

But that's a different blog entry . . . or series of blog entries.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

9 Comments:

At 10:18 AM, Blogger Kay said...

Hi Horace,

I just came upon your blog today. Your post brings up interesting points.

"I should interject that I've long held that the Qur'an's suras telling of Allah commanding the angels to bow down to the newly created Adam (7.11; 15.31-32; 38.74-75) presuppose that Adam was made in Allah's image (else why the command to bow down?)"

One thing to consider is the ordering of Allah's (swt) beings. Humans are of higher rank of jinn and both are of higher rank of angels in terms of their intelligence. Angels are not able to go against a commandment of Allah (swt), but humans (and jinn) go against the commands the prophets brought all the time.

Not to put in my own interpretation, but the point of the story is the jinn Iblis (aka Satan) and it is not to discuss humans being formed in the image of Allah (swt), which I reject by the way. In Islam, Iblis is considered a pure ENEMY to humans symbolized by his refusal to bow. Iblis (aka Satan) is NOT a friend of humans, while angels and Allah (swt) are. Allahu Alim.

You must also consider allegory versus literal. I think this verse is an allegorical one. The implication of this could be that the angels did not literally prostrate to humans. Like I said earlier, one of the points of this story is to contrast Allah's (swt) creation of angels, jinn, and humans. The point is that the angels did what Allah (swt) told them to do, Iblis refused, and humans are of a higher rank than both jinn and angels. I believe you are taking a literal meaning to an allegorical story. Allahu Alim.

The scholar's answer to the question is a well written reply. Nothing whatsoever is like Allah (swt) because then that would mean that He has partners, and then that would mean that He is not One and utterly unique. It doesn't mean that we cannot draw our hearts close to Allah (swt). In Islam we believe in fitra, an inborn ability to understand God. I don't need the Qur'an to prove to my heart there is God; rather, the Qur'an's purpose is primarily to tell us of things we cannot know without prophecy, like Judgement Day. Anthropomorphism is completely and utterly rejected in Islam.

I suggest that research more about Islamic Theology before you jump to fast to conclusions about what Islam actually says about Allah (swt). For example, Ghazali's "The Reliance of the Traveler" speaks at length about the nature of God. Imam Tahawi's aqeeda does as well.

May Allah (swt) increase us in knowledge. Allahu Alim.

 
At 2:15 PM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Kay, thanks for the comment.

(By the way, I go by my middle name, "Jeffery.")

If I recall, there are some early controversies in Islam about the status of "Iblis" -- some early Muslims arguing that he is an angel. But I'm no expert on that.

My main point was that "image" means "like" -- in the sense that an image is like (or similar to) the original. Perhaps there is some distinction in the Arabic terms that isn't conveyed in English, but to be made in Allah's image would imply some similarity, however that similarity might be defined.

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

 
At 6:22 PM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Kay, I had some time, so I did another Google search and found the sort of thing that I was thinking of about concerning Iblis as an angel:

Is Satan an Angel or a Jinn?As the article clarifies, the Qur'an itself seems to consider Iblis as an angel.

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

 
At 11:59 PM, Blogger Kay said...

Hi Jeffery,

Let's investigate what the Islamic scholars say about Iblis.

Whether Iblis is an angel or jinn has been somewhat of contention. Ultimately we ALWAYS say God Most High knows best.

Let's see what SunniPath Online says (http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=5187&CATE=239):

"The opinion that Iblis, may Allah curse him, was an angel is transmitted by Sayyidina Ibn `Abbas (may Allah have mercy on father and son). The Reviver of the Sunna, Imam al-Baghawi, said in his tafsir about His saying, Most High, "except Iblis, he was from the jinn" (Kahf, 50), Ibn `Abbas said, that he was a creature among the angels called the jinn.

There is some difference of opinion in the issue, for it has been related by other than Ibn `Abbas that Iblis was not an angel, but rather was really one of the jinn, and he was actually the first of the jinn, just as Sayyidina Adam, Allah bless him and give him peace, was the first of mankind. The tafsir of Imam al-Baghawi mentions that Imam al-Hasan al-Basri said this."

In Muhammad Asad's footnotes to his translation of the Qur'an, he writes:

(2:34) "The fact of this "rebellion", repeatedly stressed in the Qur'an, has led some of the commentators to the conclusion that he could not have been one of the angels, since these are incapable of sinning: "they do not bear themselves with false pride. .. and they do whatever they are bidden to do" ( 16:49 -50). As against this, other commentators point to the Qur'anic phrasing of God's command to the angels and of Iblis' refusal to obey, which makes it absolutely clear that at the time of that command he was indeed one of the heavenly host. Hence, we must assume that his "rebellion" has a purely symbolic significance and is, in reality, the outcome of a specific function assigned to him by God (see note 31 on 15:41 )"

16:49-50 says: "For, before God prostrates itself all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth - every beast that moves, and the angels: [even] these do not bear themselves with false pride: they fear their Sustainer high above them, and do whatever they are bidden to do."

Iblis went against what Allah (swt) commanded, something angels CANNOT do.

Also, we must consider the metaphorical substance each being (angel, jinn & human) are made of: angels are of light, jinn are of fire, and humans are of clay/dirt.

"'A'isha reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: The angels were born out of light and the Jinns were born out of the spark of fire and Adam was born as he has been defined (in the Qur'an) for you (i. e. he is fashioned out of clay). (Book #042, Hadith #7134)" from Muslim hadith

Allah (swt) says that Iblis is made of fire:

"38:76 Answered [Iblis]: 'I am better than he: Thou hast created me out of fire, whereas him [i.e. humans] Thou hast created out of clay.'"

It is said of angels:

"2:98 (Asad) 'whosover is an enemy of God and His angels and His message-bearers, including Gabriel and Michael, [should know that,] verily, God is the enemy of all who deny the truth.'"

We should not be enemies of angels. Satan is our enemy, so how can he be an angel? Iblis also had free-will, something angels do not have, but what jinn and humans have. A whole chapter in the Qur'an was specifically addressed to them (Chapter 72), again, asserting that jinn have free will like humans, but humans are of a higher rank.

More on the angels:

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=5117&CATE=239

More on Iblis:

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=2734&CATE=1

With all of this evidence I strongly believe that Iblis is a jinn. Allah (swt) knows best. May Allah (swt) guide me if I am wrong.

 
At 5:59 AM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Kay, I still find the argument put forth by Sam Shamoun to be convincing. The angels were commanded to bow down to Adam, but Iblis refused. The story only makes sense if Iblis is also an angel.

As for the other point on which we disagree, i.e., one's knowledge of Allah, if I recall correctly, orthodox Islam holds that Allah is essentially unknowable. One can know only the 'attributes' that He has revealed, but these 'attributes' are nothing like what we mean by them in their human sense, nor do these 'attributes' express anything of Allah's essence.

There a sort of via negativa here, i.e., "Allah is not this, not that." Allahu Akbar itself stresses that "Allah is Greater" than anything that one might conceive of, and the manner in which Islamic theology seems to cash this expression out results in a type of agnosticism in which one can only submit to the revelation without understanding it.

Or so it seems to me.

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

 
At 9:38 AM, Blogger Kay said...

"Kay, I still find the argument put forth by Sam Shamoun to be convincing. The angels were commanded to bow down to Adam, but Iblis refused. The story only makes sense if Iblis is also an angel."

Okay you have the right to listen and agree with anti-Islamic rhetoric from people who do not have degrees in Islamic studies and who are not Muslims. I'll stick to listening to the qualified Islamic scholars who dedicated their life to the study of Qur'an, Hadith, fiqh, theology, and spirituality. Unto you your methodology and unto me mine.

This is what I found of Sam's biography from Google searching: http://www.growcenter.org/SamShamoun.htm. Who are the scholars and theologians that endorse him? They don't even list them. Where did he receive his degree in Qur'anic studies? Where did he receive his degree from hadith studies? What are the names of his Islamic teachers? Can those teachers be traced back all the way to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)?

Forgive me if I am making presumptions, but your paradigms are already fixed and you are fitting things to be what you want them to be, not what they actually are. Open your eyes! If I am wrong Allah (swt) forgive, but from my research of what scholars have said I have come to a completely different conclusion than you have.

No one should submit to words without understanding standing them. The Qur'an's message is simple: worship God alone. Muslims submit ONLY to Allah (swt), so I don't know what you mean submit to Qur'an. We recite, follow, listen, learn, analyze, and contemplate, but we bow down to Allah (swt). Qur'an is a guide for us, just like all of revelation has been a guide to humanity over and over again.

Again, this story is METAPHORICAL and NOT literal as you would like it to be. The implications are great if you try to force it to be something that it is not.

"3:7 He it is who has bestowed upon thee from on high this divine writ, containing messages that are clear in and by themselves - and these are the essence of the divine writ - as well as others that are allegorical. Now those whose hearts are given to swerving from the truth go after that part of the divine writ which has been expressed in allegory, seeking out [what is bound to create] confusion, and seeking [to arrive at] its final meaning [in an arbitrary manner]; but none save God knows its final meaning. Hence, those who are deeply rooted in knowledge say: "We believe in it; the whole [of the divine writ] is from our Sustainer - albeit none takes this to heart save those who are endowed with insight."

"As for the other point on which we disagree, i.e., one's knowledge of Allah, if I recall correctly, orthodox Islam holds that Allah is essentially unknowable. One can know only the 'attributes' that He has revealed, but these 'attributes' are nothing like what we mean by them in their human sense, nor do these 'attributes' express anything of Allah's essence."

Orthodox Sunni Islam says that once you realize that you cannot realize Allah (swt) you have realized. If we think we can know everything about God, when it is God ALONE who knows absolutely every single thing, then I think we are insulting Allah (swt). Do we not remember what happened when the people of Moses asked to see God for proof of His existence?

2:55 And [remember] when you said, "O Moses. indeed we shall not believe thee unto we see God face to face!" - whereupon the thunderbolt of punishment overtook you before your very eyes.

Orthodox Sunni Islam says that we have fitra: an inborn ability to understand Allah (swt) already but we are constantly being distracted by this world to remember we have it. You can read more about fitra in a short blog post of mine: http://e5pre55odr1nk5.blogspot.com/2008/03/fitra-return-to-natural-state.html

If what you say is true, then why is there a WHOLE part of the Islamic religion dedicated to spirituality (Ishan -- the other two being Islam and Iman)???? And this is according to the Orthodox Sunni Muslims. From a sahih hadith:

"Also on the authority of Omar, who said : One day while we were sitting with the messenger of Allah there appeared before us a man whose clothes were exceedingly white and whose hair was exceedingly black; no signs of journeying were to be seen on him and none of us knew him. He walked up and sat down by the prophet. Resting his knees against his and placing the palms of his hands on his thighs, he said:"O Muhammed, tell me about Islam". The messenger of Allah said: "Islam is to testify that there is no god but Allah and Muhammed is the messenger of Allah, to perform the prayers, to pay the zakat, to fast in Ramadhan, and to make the pilgrimage to the House if you are able to do so." He said:"You have spoken rightly", and we were amazed at him asking him and saying that he had spoken rightly. He said: "Then tell me about eman ."He said:"It is to believe in Allah, His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Last Day, and to believe in divine destiny, both the good and the evil thereof." He said:"You have spoken rightly". He said: " Then tell me about ehsan ." He said: "It is to worship Allah as though you are seeing Him, and while you see Him not yet truly He sees you". He said: "Then tell me about the Hour". He said: "The one questioned about it knows no better than the questioner." He said: "Then tell me about its signs." He said: "That the slave-girl will give birth to her mistress and that you will see the barefooted, naked, destitute herdsman competing in constructing lofty buildings." Then he took himself off and I stayed for a time. Then he said: "O Omar, do you know who the questioner was?" I said: "Allah and His messenger know best". He said: "He was Jebreel (Gabriel), who came to you to teach you your religion.""

**********

Jeffery I say this to you purely as a friend (although I know you won't like to hear it): don't take random Internet sites that are anti-Islam as your source.

I'm trying to guide you, but here I stop because whatever else I say, you probably won't listen to.

Allahu Alim. May Allah (swt) guide us towards knowledge and show us the straight path.

 
At 9:58 AM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Kay, you are making a lot of assumptions about me.

All that I've said is that the story of Iblis refusing to bow down to Adam implies that Allah's command to the angels to bow down also applied to Iblis since he's condemned for not bowing down, and that implies that Iblis was also considered an angel.

That seems to be the case regardless of how Muslim theologians explain the discrepancy.

As for Sam Shamoun, I know little about him, but his basic argument makes sense to me, and that is surely what matters.

Your assumption seems to be that the Qur'an does not contradict itself, but I don't see the necessity of making that assumption.

The fitrah that you refer to, my understanding is that it designates an inborn inclination to worship Allah, but is it really a means to knowledge of Allah's essential nature?

In your opinion, what is Allah's essential nature? Doesn't orthodox Islam teach that Allah in Himself is beyond any concept that we might apply? There would seem to be no intellectual access to Allah?

By fitrah, perhaps is meant an experience of Allah, but an experience must be interpreted within intellectual categories, so we once again confront the problem.

Or so I think.

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

 
At 1:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I come from over here, I mostly do writings in evolutionary pyschology/meditation and philosophy, I like to write satire's and investigate fundamental religious questions as well.
http://mrdehaven.blogspot.com/
But enough about me,

Hi Horace

I agree with Kay, I think the Qur'an isn't discussing free will in the verse your debating, it's discussing the problem of evil or why evil exists.

I don't know how you would interpret the Qur'an to mean man is made in the image of Allah unless your applying a Christian interpretation to the Qur'an.

I mean when it is written in the bible "Man is made in the image of God" it is implied that man is made in the image of understanding or perfect wisdom and that the body of man and man's abilities enabled him to manipulate the environment and God allowed this thus enabling free will.

From an empirical viewpoint, I have never seen an angel or a demon manipulate the environment, the old Torah never asserted Angels have free will, Satan is in the Torah but regarded more as a judge or a tempter as opposed to an evil force attacking men while possessing the ability of rational thought.

you pose an interesting question though, but ultimately as a Catholic or believer in universal moral values I must assert that demons don't have free will but rather come from a lack of understanding the higher power such as Allah or God or whatever.

In other words, Demons don't have free will, there is one God and not many and the main difference between Islam and Catholicism stems from the understanding of what God's image is.

To a Catholic, God is shown to be understanding through Solomon and the book of wisdom, God reveals an aura of his true nature through wisdom which in turn enables one to see how God truly is and what one should pray for. Then the new testament sets up the stage for not having excessive lengthy oral prayers in the hopes of manipulating God's will with Christ asserting to avoid lengthy prayers and focus on understanding God and working with God's will as opposed to fighting it.

What exactly God's will is though is a mystery to most people and many become Atheist because they watch fundamentalists and other miss-interpreters of the bible go out and twist the words according to the needs of their church or denomination and not according to how the book is meant to be read.

So in answer to your question, Man is made in the image of God because man can use understanding through language to change his fate, while animals do not have sophisticated languages to enable them to create nuclear weapons and etc.

I mean many animals are capable of rudimentary communication and even Monkeys can anticipate the future, but what is unique about man is his combined ability to speak an rapidly evolving language with his fellow men and have a-pose-able thumbs to make hunting weapons and build houses with. Oh and the bonus of his ability to retain experiences and manipulate them in the mind doesn't hurt his language skills.

So, you see that man is made in the image of God and not Allah, because Allah is unknowable, God is known only through the virtues and seeking understanding to the point of philosophy or the love of understanding.

 
At 5:15 AM, Blogger Horace Jeffery Hodges said...

Mr. DeHaven, you set up your link wrong, so let me correct that link.

I don't see that your comment addresses the blog entry. I wasn't asking about free will or about why mankind was made in the image of God.

I was simply asking what Muslims meant by the assertion that mankind is made in Allah's image.

Also, I go by "Jeffery," not by "Horace."

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

 

Post a Comment

<< Home