::jseblod::onislam_article::/jseblod::
::onislamarticleaction::::/onislamarticleaction::
::artpretitle::People with Special Needs:::/artpretitle::
::artsubtitle:: ::/artsubtitle::
::artseries:: ::/artseries::
::artlead::Why does disability exist if God is the most Merciful? Why does He allow disability to exist if He has control over everything? Does having a disability automatically indicate a sign of God's wrath and punishment?::/artlead::
::artepigraph:: ::/artepigraph::
::artbody::
Why does disability exist if God is the most Merciful?
Why does He allow disability to exist if He has control over everything?
Does having a disability automatically indicate a sign of God's wrath and punishment?
Handling such questions fall generally, in Islam, within the tasks entrusted to Muslim theologians, whose answers are recorded in a number of Islamic sources handling the existence of pain, suffering, diseases, and so forth, in the light of God's characteristics such as mercy, justice, power.. Giving a systematic presentation of these answers is the focus of this article.
One of the key terms which have played a major role in classifying responses provided by Muslims theologians in this issue is "talil" which literally means causation, or the search for causes, and refers to the logical relationship between cause and effect. (Kamali 46-51)
On Islam and the Disabled - People With Special Needs: Prophet's Care |
The theological usage of talil indicates the quest for the wise Divine purposes for God's actions within the human perspective, whether these actions are good or bad. (Hasan 12:98-101)
Considering the topic of this article, discussions will be restricted to those bids to evolve mental arguments in order to clarify or justify disability in particular, and pain, suffering, and evils in general. This restricted sense of talil is close to the term "theodicy" coined by Gottfried Leibniz (d. 1716) from the Greek theos (God) and dike (justice). (Leibniz)
On the basis of their standpoint from talil — which we will hereon refer to as theodicy — three main trends can be traced in Islamic theology: namely, anti-theodicy, pro-theodicy, and the mainstream approach.
Anti-Theodicy & Pro-Theodicy
Main advocates of the first trend were known in Islamic literature as nufat al-talil (deniers or repudiators of theodicy), whereas those of the second trend were labelled as ahl al-adl wal-tawhid (partisans of justice and unity). (Shahrastani 5:58)
| being born with disability, or becoming disabled afterwards, is to be accepted... |
The starting point of the former is the absolute affirmation of God as the inscrutable Almighty Who "is not to be questioned". God, they argue, does not command an act because that act is just and good; it is His command which makes it just and good. (Ibn Taymiyyah 125)
Thus, being born with disability, or becoming disabled afterwards, is to be accepted with no further search for mental justifications, because Allah Almighty runs His own kingship as He pleases. In short, they closed the gate at an earlier stage.
Accusing the anti-theodicy proponents of creating a tyrant image for God, the starting point of pro-theodicy advocates is God's justice rather than God's omnipotence. To them, God's justice is to be measured by the same criterion used for judging human justice. (Gimaret 281-283)
As for God's justice, holders of this contention do not ascribe all disabilities or pains in life to God alone. Regarding freedom of humans to act in this life as a central theme in their theology, disabilities taking place in this life are to be divided on the basis of the liable agent as
(1) self-inflicted disability,
(2) disability inflicted by humans or animals, and finally,
(3) disability inflicted by God.
They hold the opinion that man measures and determines his actions himself by reason of qudra (an effective power) which belongs to him, but which has been created by God in each man. (Gardet)
Of these sorts, God is held responsible only for the third category, whereas questions about the wise purpose of bringing the other two categories into existence are to be directed to the liable agents and not to God. However, in case of missing justice in the first two categories, God would be responsible for administering it. (Heemskerk 182-183)
Focusing on the third category (disabilities inflicted by God), scholars of this trend state that disability inflicted by God is always good, because it is either (1) deserved punishment, or (2) involving a profit or benefit. (Heemskerk 161-167)
According to a minority group within this trend, inflicting disability can be divine punishment that God inflicts in advance to account for sins to be committed in the future (Heemskerk 160).
However, this contention is not applicable for illnesses suffered by living beings that, according to this doctrine, cannot have deserved punishment such as Prophets and animals. That is because prophets are infallible, so they do nothing wrong to be punished for, and animals are not legally accountable in Islam.
| disabilities in this life could warn people against those sorts of disabilities taking place in the Hereafter. |
Strikingly enough, another minority of those belonging to this trend contend that illnesses and pains are deserved punishments for bad acts done in previous lives, as was believed by the adherents of the transmigration of souls (Heemskerk). However, these ideas were rejected by the majority of this trend. (Al-Shahrastani 1:74-77)
Regarding the nature of benefit ensuing from being inflicted with disability or other sorts of pain, opinions of this trend fluctuate between lutf (Divine assistance) and iwad (compensation). (Heemskerk 159)
As for the former, they state that several of God's actions towards humans have a relation to God's taklif (that is, the obligations that God has charged humans with). God imposes obligations on all adults of sound mind (mukallafun, or those who are able to be charged and held accountable) with the purpose of giving them the opportunity to earn reward (Al-Ashari 246, Abrahamov 16:7-43, Heemskerk 157), and thus, He must impose on them something difficult, but not so difficult that it is impossible. (Heemskerk 154)
Additionally, God has obliged himself to do certain things and acts to enable people to fulfil that which He has imposed on them (Heemskerk 154)
Another suggested benefit is that disabilities in this life could warn people against those sorts of disabilities taking place in the Hereafter.
For instance, Allah (God) states that those who went astray from the straight path in this life will be resurrected on the Day of Resurrection having blindness, dumbness, and deafness. (17:97; 20:124-26)
As for the second explanation this trend provides, they state that pain inflicted by God or by His command or permission is compensated for by Him. God gives the compensation in order to ensure that His infliction of pain is not a bad act. (Heemskerk 164-165)
Some scholars say that this compensation can only take place in the hereafter, while others say it can take place in this life or in the next. But either way, God gives the compensation after the harm is done, and not beforehand.
Mainstream Approach
Contrary to the advocates of anti-theodicy — who stress Divine power over Divine justice — and those of pro-theodicy (who did the opposite), proponents of this trend strove for a middle ground by making use of what they deem beneficial, and casting away those harmful ideas contended by each trend. (Heemskerk 186)
Regarding Divine omnipotence, proponents of this approach state that the existence of evils and abnormalities in life is proof that God exists, and that He alone has created this life and all creatures therein.
Otherwise, they say:
"...it would be possible that each thing would create for itself such states and characteristics as are the best and most beautiful, and, so, by doing this, it would be false to say that moral and physical evils exist. But the fact of their existence shows that the existence of the world came about by something other than itself..." (Ibn Al-Qayyim 1:51-52)
| disability can also be an instrument of attaining lofty degrees and ranks in Paradise |
Furthermore, disabilities can be (rather than saying they necessarily must be) a disciplinary tool to reform and rehabilitate those who are disobedient and insist on going against the Divine instructions without having acceptable excuses. They also do not exert serious bids to repair these mistakes by asking forgiveness from God and turning to Him in repentance to avoid Divine punishment that would take place in this life or in the hereafter. (Maturidi 17)
As for the attribute of Divine justice, advocates of this trend argue that disability as a punishment still entails beneficial elements for the punished person. Disability in this case, has a purgative function in the sense that it is one of the main instruments of expiating the sins and saving that person from much more grievous punishments in the hereafter. (Alusi 25:41)
Insisting on the fact that disability can be — but does not necessarily have to be — a sort of punishment, proponents of this approach state that disability can be also a source of rewards. In this regard, one of them confirms that Allah visits people He loves with affliction so that He will give them reward in return. (Asqalani 10:108)
Moreover, disability can also be an instrument of attaining lofty degrees and ranks in Paradise that would have been unattainable through one's good deeds alone. (Zidan 213)
Prophetic traditions supporting this fact are numerous and well-known, to the extent that some compilers of books on Prophetic traditions dedicated specific chapters for such traditions, such as Al-Haythami, who entitled one of his chapters "Section of Attaining the [honorable] Ranks by Affliction" (2:292)
Between being a disciplinary tool and beneficial instrument, disability remains a means of testing one's faith. This argument remains the most well-known explanation for the existence of disability and suffering in general among common Muslims. Scholars quote in this regard the sagacious statement:
"O my son! Gold and silver are to be examined by fire and the believer is to be examined by affliction" (Minawi 2:459)
One of the main assertions typical for this trend, but also shared by the other two as well, is that disability should not be a stigma for those visited with it. One of the advocates of the last trend, speaking about blindness, says, "Blindness does not cause any harm for one's religion. What is harmful is blindness befalling one's heart that moves the person away from God" (Bujayramiyy 4:427)
This holds true to the extent that one is recommended to have sympathy and be helpful to people with disabilities. (Asqalani 12:76)
Based on this inclusive approach, we can easily speak about an overall positive attitude towards people with disabilities in Islamic literature. One scholar says, "Preliminary evidence suggests that the physically and mentally disabled were not necessarily stigmatized or marginalized" (Scalenghe 209)
Another scholar says, "Against the abusive attitudes to the disabled in the Roman and Byzantine empires as well as in the dark Middle Ages in Europe, the attitudes in Islamic law were in every way enlightened and farseeing" (Rispler-Chaim 95)
However, this positive attitude, as recorded in theological and juristic sources, does not negate the social reality which was not always in line with what these sources plead for. This holds true, of course, for the current reality of people with disabilities in different parts of the Muslim world.
Works Cited:
Abrahamov, Binyamin. Abd al-Jabbar's Theory of Divine Assistance. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, Hebrew University, 1993.
Al-Ashari, Abul-Hassan. Maqalat al-Islamiyyin wa Ikhtilaf al-Musallin. Ed. Hellmut Ritter. 3rd Ed. Beirut: Dar Ihiya al-Turath al-Arabi, 1993.
Al-Bujayramiyy, Sulayman b. Muhammad. Hashiyat al-Bijirmi ala al-Khatib. Vol. 4. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1951.
Al-Haythami, Abul-Hassan. Majma Al-Zawaid. Vol. 2. Beirut: Muassasat al-Maarif, 1986.
Al-Maturidi, Abu Mansur. Kitab Al-Tawhid. Ed. Fathalla Kholeif. Beirut: Dar Al-Machreq, 1970.
Al-Asqalani, Ibn Hajar. Fath al-Bari. Vol. 9. Beirut: Dar al-Marifa, 1959.
Al-Minawi, Abd al-Rauf. Fayd Al-Qadir Sharh Al-Jami Al-Saghir. 1st Ed. Vol. 2. Egypt: Al-Maktaba al-Tijariyyah al-Kubra, 1937.
Al-Shahrastani, Taj al-Din Abu al-Fath Muhammad ibn Abd al-Karim. Al-Milal wa al-Nihal. 5th Ed. Vol. 1. Beirut: Dar al-Marifa, 1996.
Gardet, L. Al-Qada wa al-Qadar. The Encyclopaedia of Islam. CD-ROM Edition. Leiden: Brill, 2003.
Gimaret, Daniel. Théories de l’acte Humain en Théologie Musulmane. Paris: J.Vrin, 1980.
Hasan, Ahmad. Rationality of Islamic Legal Injunctions: The Problem of Valuation (Talil). Vol. XIII. Islamic Studies, 1974.
Heemskerk, Margaretha T. Pain and Compensation in Mu'tazilite Doctrine: Abd al-Jabbar’s Teaching. Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen, 1995.
Ibn al-Qayyim, Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr ibn Saad. Shifa al-Alil fi Masail al-Qada wa al-Qadar wa al-Hikma wa al-Talil. Vol. 1. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1984.
Ibn Taymiyyah, Taqi ad-Din Ahmad. Majmu al-Rasail. Cairo: Al-Maktabah As-Salafiyah, 1974.
Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence. 3rd Ed. The Islamic Texts Society, 2003.
Leibniz, G. W. Theodicy: Essays on the Goodness of God, the Freedom of Man, and the Origin of Evil. Trans. E. M. Huggard. London: Routledge, 1951.
Rispler-Chaim, Vardit. Disability in Islamic Law. New York: Springer, 2006.
Scalenghe, Sarah. Towards a History of Disability in the Middle East: Attitudes to the Deaf in Ottoman Syria: Rethinking Culture in the Ottoman 18th Century. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005.
Zidan. Abd al-Karim. Al-Sunan Al-Ilahiyyah fi Al-Umam wa Al-Jamat wa Al-Afrad fi Al-Shariah Al-Islamiyyah. 3rd Ed. Beirut: Muassasat al-Risalah, 1994.
::/artbody::::artendnote::The content of this article is taken from chapter 2 of the book "Islam and Disability: Perspectives in Islamic Theology and Jurisprudence" (Ghaly, Mohammed. Leiden: Leiden University, 2008). It is being republished here with kind permission and slight editorial changes.::/artendnote::
::artfootnote::First Published: February 2010::/artfootnote::
::artmainimage::oimedia/onislamen/images/mainimages/3-12-14_Islamic-Perspectives-on-People-with-Disabilities.jpg::/artmainimage::
::artcaption::Islamic theology presents an overall positive attitude towards disabled people. ::/artcaption::
::artalt:: ::/artalt::
::artauthor::11713::/artauthor::
::artboximage::::/artboximage::
::artinterviewer:: ::/artinterviewer::
::artcompiler:: ::/artcompiler::
::artreviewer:: ::/artreviewer::
::arttranslator:: ::/arttranslator::
::artsource:: ::/artsource::
::artreference:: ::/artreference::
::artlink1::Peace in an Unstable World::/artlink1::
::artlinkurl1::http://www.onislam.net/english/reading-islam/understanding-islam/islam-and-the-world/worldview/454251-peace-in-an-unstable-world.html::/artlinkurl1::
::artlink2::Dad… Why is it so Hard to Say " I Love You"?::/artlink2::
::artlinkurl2::http://www.onislam.net/english/reading-islam/about-muhammad/his-character/417015-dadwhy-is-it-so-hard-to-say-q-i-love-youq.html::/artlinkurl2::
::artlink3::Curse of the Modern Mindset of Success (Part-1)::/artlink3::
::artlinkurl3::http://www.onislam.net/english/reading-islam/living-islam/growing-in-faith/480249-curse-of-the-modern-mindset-of-success.html::/artlinkurl3::
::artlink4::Was This Religion for Me?::/artlink4::
::artlinkurl4::http://www.onislam.net/english/reading-islam/my-journey-to-islam/contemporary-stories/446230-was-this-religion-for-me.html::/artlinkurl4::
::artlink5::Looking for Peace and Serenity? (Folder)::/artlink5::
::artlinkurl5::http://www.onislam.net/english/reading-islam/in-focus/463673-looking-for-peace-and-serenity-folder.html::/artlinkurl5::
::button_submit::::/button_submit::
::jseblodend::::/jseblodend::