Do Asharis deny wisdom in Allah Most High’s actions

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In the Name of Allah Most Merciful Most Kind

Short Answer

No, it is not correct to say that Asharis deny wisdom in Allah Most High’s actions. Rather they deny Illah (علة). Which may be translated as cause or purpose. They also deny Gharad (غرض), which is benefit or goal. Such denial is controversial and many Maturidis strongly disagreed with this position. Some Asharis phrased their position in a troubling manner which has caused condemnation.

Explanation

قَالُوا سُبْحَانَكَ لَا عِلْمَ لَنَا إِلَّا مَا عَلَّمْتَنَا إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْعَلِيمُ الْحَكِيمُ

They said, Transcendent are You! We have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Indeed, it is You who is the all Knowing, the absolutely Wise. (Surah al-Baqarah, 32).

There are so many verses in the Holy Quran that affirm the wisdom of Allah Most High. Therefore, it would be extremely troubling if Asharis deny wisdom in Allah Most High’s actions. In the Nass below we find Imam al-Taftazaani affirming wisdom in divine actions. However, he did negate actions being intrinsically good or bad. Which may lead an individual to conclude that he is denying wisdom.

Imam al-Taftazaani

(وفى ارسال الرسل) جمع رسول. فعول من الرسالة. وهى سفارة العبد بين الله تعالى وبين ذوى الألباب من خليقته ليزيح بها عللهم فيما قصرت عنه عقولهم، من مصالح الدنيا والآخرة وقد عرفت معنى الرسول والنبي فى صدر الكتاب (حكمة) أى مصلحة وعاقبة حميدة. وفى هذا اشارة الى أن الارسال واجب، لا بمعنى الوجوب على الله تعالى، بل بمعنى أن قضية الحكمة تقتضيه لما فيه من الحكم والمصالح، وليس بممتنع، كما زعمت السمنية والبراهمة. ولا بممكن يستوى طرفاه، كما ذهب إليه بعض المتكلمين. (شرح العقائد النسفية)

(And in sending the messengers) plural of messenger. It is the Fa’ool form from Risaalah. It is ambassadorship of the servant between Allah Most High and the wise among His creation. To remove their ailments in what their minds fall short. From the interests of this world and the hereafter. You have learned the meaning of messenger and prophet at the beginning of the book. (Wisdom) meaning benefit and good consequences. This indicates that sending is obligatory. Not in the sense that it is obligatory upon Allah Most High. Rather in the sense that wisdom dictates it. Due to the wisdom and benefits entailed therein. It is not impossible, as the Samniyah and Brahmins claimed. Nor is it possible such that the two sides are equal, as some theologians have claimed. (Imam Sa’d al-Deen al-Taftazaani 793H, Sharh al-Aqaid al-Nasafiyah).  

In the following Nass (text), Imam al-Taftazaani makes a controversial statement. Asserting that Allah (Most High) could command what He (Most High) forbade, and it would become good. Many Ashari Imams have said similar things. Which is part of what has caused people to say Asharis deny wisdom in the actions of Allah (Most High).

The same people also take great exception to practical examples of this principle. They say it dictates Kufr (disbelief) and oppression (Dhulm) could theoretically be considered good or righteousness. However, I believe a bigger problem is delving into such theoretical discussions. It does nothing to further the veneration of Allah (Most High).

وإنما النزاع في الحسن والقبح عند الله تعالى بمعنى استحقاق فاعله في حكم الله تعالى المدح أو الذم عاجلا والثواب والعقاب آجلا ومبنى التعرض للثواب والعقاب على أن الكلام في أفعال العباد فعندنا ذلك بمجرد الشرع بمعنى أن العقل لا يحكم بأن الفعل حسن أو قبيح في حكم الله تعالى بل ما ورد الأمر به فهو حسن وما ورد النهي عنه فقبيح من غير أن يكون للعقل جهة محسنة أو مقبحة في ذاته ولا بحسب جهاته واعتباراته حتى لو أمر بما نهى عنه صار حسنا وبالعكس وعندهم للفعل جهة محسنة أو مقبحة في حكم الله تعالى يدركها العقل بالضرورة كحسن الصدق النافع وقبح الكذب الضار. (شرح المقاصد في علم الكلام)

Rather, the dispute is about what is good and bad in the sight of Allah Most High. Meaning that the doer of the action is deserving of praise or blame in the immediate judgment of Allah Most High, and reward and punishment in the future. The basis of exposure to reward and punishment, when the discussion is about the actions of the servants, is based on the law alone, for us. Meaning that the mind does not rule that the action is good or bad in the judgment of Allah Most High. Rather whatever is commanded is good, and whatever is forbidden is bad, without the mind having an impact in rendering it good or bad intrinsically. Nor according to its aspects and considerations. Such that if He commands what he forbade, it becomes good, and vice versa. But with them, the action has a good or bad aspect in the ruling of Allah Most High, which the mind necessarily perceives. Like the goodness of beneficial truthfulness and the badness of harmful lying. (Imam Sa’d al-Deen al-Taftazaani 793H, Sharh al-Maqasid).

Other manifestations

When we look at the works of Ashari Imams, the same core issue manifests in different ways. Imam al-Ghazali spoke about it being (theoretically) possible for Allah Most High to forgive all the unbelievers and punish all the believers.

He said this in the context of explaining how Allah Most High is not restricted. Rather does as He Most High wills. Thus, the goal was clearly noble, but the specific example raises serious questions.

Also, one could deduce from this that Asharis deny wisdom in the actions of Allah (Most High). However, we will find numerous explicit texts where Imam al-Ghazali himself affirms the divine wisdom in the actions of Allah (Most High).

ندعي أن الله تعالى إذا كلف العباد فأطاعوه لم يجب عليه الثواب، بل إن شاء أثابهم وإن شاء عاقبهم وإن شاء أعدمهم ولم يحشرهم، ولا يبالي لو غفر لجميع الكافرين وعاقب جميع المؤمنين، ولا يستحيل ذلك في نفسه ولا يناقض صفة من صفات الإلهية، وهذا لأن التكليف تصرف في عبيده ومماليكه، أما الثواب ففعل آخر على سبيل الابتداء. (الاقتصاد في الاعتقاد).

We claim that if Allah Most High commands His servants and they obey Him, He is not obligated to reward them. Rather, if He wills, He will reward them, and if He wills, He will punish them, and if He wills, He will annihilate them and not gather them. He does not care if He forgives all the unbelievers and punishes all the believers. This is not impossible in itself. Nor does it contradict any of the attributes of divinity. This is because the obligating responsibility is an action taken regarding His slaves and servants, while reward is another action in the form of an initiation. (Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali 505H, al-Iqtisaad).

قَالَ أَوَّلًا: إِنَّا أَعْطَيْناكَ ثُمَّ قَالَ ثَانِيًا: فَصَلِّ لِرَبِّكَ وَانْحَرْ وَهَذَا يَدُلُّ عَلَى أَنَّ إعطاؤه لِلتَّوْفِيقِ وَالْإِرْشَادِ سَابِقٌ عَلَى طَاعَاتِنَا، وَكَيْفَ لَا يَكُونُ كَذَلِكَ وَإِعْطَاؤُهُ إِيَّانَا صِفَتُهُ وَطَاعَتُنَا لَهُ صِفَتُنَا، وَصِفَةُ الْخَلْقِ لَا تَكُونُ مُؤَثِّرَةً فِي صِفَةِ الْخَالِقِ إِنَّمَا الْمُؤَثِّرُ هُوَ صِفَةُ الْخَالِقِ فِي صِفَةِ الْخَلْقِ، وَلِهَذَا نُقِلَ عَنِ الْوَاسِطِيِّ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: لَا أَعْبُدُ رَبًّا يُرْضِيهِ طَاعَتِي وَيُسْخِطُهُ مَعْصِيَتِي وَمَعْنَاهُ أَنَّ رِضَاهُ وَسُخْطَهُ قَدِيمَانِ وَطَاعَتِي وَمَعْصِيَتِي مُحْدَثَتَانِ وَالْمُحْدَثُ لَا أَثَرَ لَهُ فِي قَدِيمٍ، بَلْ رِضَاهُ عَنِ الْعَبْدِ هُوَ الَّذِي حَمَلَهُ عَلَى طَاعَتِهِ فِيمَا لَا يَزَالُ، وَكَذَا الْقَوْلُ فِي السُّخْطِ وَالْمَعْصِيَةِ. (التفسير الكبير)

He said first: Indeed, We have given you. Then He said second: So pray to your Lord and sacrifice. This indicates that His giving is facilitation and guidance which precedes our obedience. How could it not be so, when His giving us is His attribute and our obedience to Him is our attribute. The attribute of creation has no effect on the attribute of the Creator. The effective factor is the attribute of the Creator in the attribute of creation.

For this reason, it was reported from al-Wasiti that he said: I do not worship a Lord whom my obedience pleases and whom my disobedience angers. He means that His pleasure and anger are eternal. Whilst my obedience and disobedience are two newly created matters, and what is newly created has no trace in the past. Rather, His pleasure with the servant is what drives him to obey Him continuously. The same is said about displeasure and disobedience. (Imam Fakhr al-Deen al-Razi 606H, Mafateeh al-Ghayb).

In the Nass (text) above, Imam al-Razi quotes from Imam al-Wasiti saying: I do not worship a Lord whom my obedience pleases and whom my disobedience angers. Once again, the point he is making may be a valid one. However, the particular manner of phrasing it can cause widespread confusion and condemnation.

His point being, the temporal cannot impact the pre-eternal. However, the way it has been articulated seems to clash with the fundamentals of Islam. And it once again opens the doors to people asserting that Asharis deny wisdom in the actions of Allah (Most High).

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ أُولَئِكَ هُمْ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ. جَزَاؤُهُمْ عِنْدَ رَبِّهِمْ جَنَّاتُ عَدْنٍ تَجْرِي مِنْ تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَضُوا عَنْهُ ذَلِكَ لِمَنْ خَشِيَ رَبَّهُ

Indeed, those who have believed and done righteous deeds – those are the best of creation. Their reward with their Lord is Gardens of Adn beneath which rivers flow, wherein they eternally abide forever. Allah is pleased with them, and they are pleased with Him. That is for him who fears his Lord. (Surah al-Bayinah, 7-8).

The point

As we see from the above discussion, often the point being made is sound but the manner in which it is made can raise serious contentions. The fundamental point many of these Ashari Imams are making is that Allah Most High is not restricted in His actions.

Divine actions are not dictated to by purpose or cause (علة). Nor by goal or benefit (غرض). Yet they are filled with wisdom. Thus, we cannot say Asharis deny wisdom. Rather they deny علة and غرض. They also assert that the intellect cannot know good and bad, only the divine command can establish that.

وأنه لا يسأل في شيء من ذلك عما يفعل، ولا لأفعاله علل؛ لأنه مالك غير مملوك، ولا مأمور ولا منهي. (رسالة إلى أهل الثغر)

He is not questioned about anything he does. Nor are there causes/purposes for his actions. Since He is the owner and not owned. Neither is He commanded nor forbidden. (Imam Abu al-Hassan al-Ashari 324H, Risaalah Ila Ahl a-Thaghr).

 

ويجب أن يعلم: أن الطاعة ليست بعلة الثواب، ولا المعصية علة للعقاب، ولا يجب لأحد على الله تعالى، بل الثواب وما أنعم به على العبد فضل منه، والعقاب عدل منه. ويجب على العبد ما أوجبه الله تعالى عليه، ولا موجب ولا واجب على الله. والحسن ما وافق الأمر من الفعل، والقبيح ما وافق النهي من الفعل، وليس الحسن حسناً من قبل الصورة، ولا القبيح قبيحاً من قبل الصورة. (الانصاف فيما يجب اعتقاده ولا يجوز الجهل به)

It must be known that obedience is not the cause of reward, nor is disobedience the cause of punishment. Allah Most High is not obligated to do for anyone. Rather, the reward and what He bestowed upon the servant are His grace. And punishment is His justice. What Allah Most High has obligated upon the servant is obligatory, and there is no obligation or duty upon Allah. Good is what is in accordance with the command of action. And bad is what is in accordance with the prohibition of action. Good is not good in its form, nor is bad vile in its form. (Imam Abu Bakr al-Baaqilaani 403H, al-Insaaf).

Rejecting Illah

Ashari Imams gave a number of reasons for rejecting Illah (purpose/cause) for the actions of Allah (Most High). In the Nass above, Imam Abu Bakr al-Baaqilaani alluded to the fact that deeds or actions are not good or bad based on their nature or form. Rather it is only the command of Allah (Most High) that dictates an action being good or bad.

Imam al-Baydawi also emphasised the above point. However, he went further by highlighting that the opposite is the view of the Mu’tazilah. Thus, not accepted with Ahl al-Sunnah. Once again this is not to say Asharis deny wisdom in the actions of Allah Most High. But do deny intrinsic goodness or badness within deeds.

لا قبح بالنسبة إلى الله تعالى، فإنه مالك الأمور على الإطلاق يفعل ما يشاء ويختار لا علة لصنعه ولا غاية لفعله. وأما بالنسبة إلينا، فالقبيح ما نهى عنه شرعا، والحسن ما ليس كذلك. وقالت المعتزلة القبيح قبيح في نفسه وقبحه يكون لذاته أو لصفة قائمة به، فيقبح من الله كما يقبح منا، وكذا الحسن. (طوالع الأنوار من مطالع الأنظار)

There is nothing vile in relation to Allah Most High. For He is the absolute Master of all affairs. He does what He wills and chooses. There is no cause for His creation and no goal for His action. As for us, what is vile is that which He has forbidden through the Shariah. And good is what is not (prohibited). The Mu’tazila said that the vile is vile intrinsically. So, ugliness is due to its essence or to a characteristic within it. Therefore, it is vile in relation to Allah (Most High) just as it is vile in relation to us. And the same applies to what is good. (Imam Nasir al-Deen al-Baydawi 685H, Tawali’ al-Anwar).

قَالَ: أَعْطَيْناكَ وَلَمْ يَقُلْ أَعْطَيْنَا الرَّسُولَ أَوِ النَّبِيَّ أَوِ الْعَالِمَ أَوِ الْمُطِيعَ، لِأَنَّهُ لَوْ قَالَ ذَلِكَ لَأَشْعَرَ أَنَّ تِلْكَ الْعَطِيَّةَ وَقَعَتْ مُعَلَّلَةً بِذَلِكَ الْوَصْفِ، فَلَمَّا قَالَ: أَعْطَيْناكَ عُلِمَ أَنَّ تِلْكَ الْعَطِيَّةَ غَيْرُ مُعَلَّلَةٍ بِعِلَّةٍ أَصْلًا بَلْ هِيَ مَحْضُ الِاخْتِيَارِ وَالْمَشِيئَةِ، كَمَا قَالَ: نَحْنُ قَسَمْنا [الزُّخْرُفِ: 32] اللَّهُ يَصْطَفِي مِنَ الْمَلائِكَةِ رُسُلًا وَمِنَ النَّاسِ [الْحَجِّ: 75]. (التفسير الكبير)

He said: We gave you. He did not say: We gave the Messenger, the Prophet, the scholar, or the obedient one. Since if he had said that, it would have seemed that this gift occurred based on that description. So when he said: We have given you, it became known that this gift was not based on any cause at all. Rather it is pure choice and will, as He said: We have divided. (al-Zukhruf: 32). Allah chooses from among the angels messengers and from among the people. (al-Hajj: 75). (Imam Fakhr al-Deen al-Razi 606H, Mafateeh al-Ghayb).

The position of Mutazilah

Imam al-Iji seemed to believe that rejecting غرض (benefit) in the actions of Allah Most High is a Mu’tazili position. This is concerning because that is clearly the position of leading scholars of the Maturidi school of Aqidah. Which is undoubtedly within Ahl al-Sunnah.

Students of Aqeedah must understand that it is not uncommon for Imams of the science to designate a position or belief to deviants, whilst it is more correctly described as a position within Ahl al-Sunnah. This approach has caused much confusion and division within the Ummah.

Thus, scholars and teachers of Aqeedah must check thoroughly before describing something as deviant. Such behavior is the hallmark of sectarian preachers in our time. They seek out the most divisive presentation of a particular issue and propagate it to the masses.

أفعال الله تعالى ليست معللة بالأغراض إليه ذهب الأشاعرة وخالفهم فيه المعتزلة لنا بعدما بينا من أنه لا يجب عليه شيء ولا يقبح منه شيء وجهان أحدهما لو كان فعله تعالى لغرض لكان ناقصا لذاته مستكملا بتحصيل ذلك الغرض لأنه لا يصلح غرضا للفاعل إلا ما هو أصلح له من عدمه. (كتاب المواقف)

The actions of Allah Most High are not purposed by goals. The Ash’aris went with this. They opposed the Mu’tazilah therein. After we have shown that nothing is necessary for Him and nothing is repugnant from Him. We have two perspectives. One of them is that if His (Most High) action was for a purpose, it would be deficient in itself, and complete by obtaining that purpose. Since it is not correct for it to be the doer’s purpose, except that it is more beneficial for him than it not being. (Imam Adud al-Deen al-Iji 756H, al-Mawaqif).

One may conclude from the above Nass (text) that Imam al-Iji is negating benefit for Allah (Most High) in His divine actions. Which is utterly uncontroversial. However, Imam al-Iji explained elsewhere that his position is that benefit for creation is not the purpose. It is due to views like this that many people claim that Asharis deny wisdom in the actions of Allah (Most High).

خلود أهل النار في النار من فعل الله ولا نفع فيه لهم ولا لغيرهم ضرورة. (كتاب المواقف)

The eternality of the people of Hell in Hell is the action of Allah. Yet there is no benefit in it for them or for others by necessity. (Imam Adud al-Deen al-Iji 756H, al-Mawaqif).

In the following Nass, Imam al-Amidi mentions the argument Sunnis use against the Mu’tazilah when it comes to obliging Salah and Aslah. However, he is using it in the context of those rejecting غرض (purpose/benefit) in the actions of Allah Most High. Thus, it is being used against Maturidis.

This, once again, demonstrates how a genuine difference of opinion between Asharis and Maturidis is being treated as a matter of deviance. Whereas it should be treated as difference within Ahl al-Sunnah.

لو فرضنا ثلاثة أشخاص: مات أحدهم مسلما قبل البلوغ، وبلغ الآخران، ومات أحدهما مسلما، والآخر كافرا. فمن مقتضى أصول الخصوم على ما استدعاه التعديل أن تكون رتبة المسلم البالغ فوق رتبة الصبى المسلم؛ لكونه أطاع بالغا، وتخليد الكافر فى الجحيم لكفره. فلو قال الصبى: يا رب العالمين. لم حرمتنى هذه الرتبة العلية التى أعطيتها للمسلم البالغ، ولم تمنعه إياها. فلو قدر الجواب: لأنه أطاع بالغا. وقال الصبى: فلم لا أحييتني إلى أن أبلغ، وأطيع؛ فتحصل لى هذه الرتبة. فلو قدر الجواب: لأنى علمت أنك لو بلغت لعصيتنى؛ فكان اخترامك هو الأنفع لك، وانحطاطك إلى هذه الرتبة أصلح لنفسك؛ فللبالغ الكافر أن يقول: فلم لا أمتنى قبل البلوغ لعلمك بكفرى بتقدير البلوغ، فلا يبقى لموجب الغرض جواب. وهذا قاطع فى نفى لزوم الغرض، لا غبار عليه. (أبكار الأفكار في أصول الدين)

Let us suppose three people, one if them died as a Muslim before reaching puberty. The other two reached puberty. One of whom died as a Muslim and the other as a disbeliever. The opponent’s principles require, according to what he claimed of equality, that the rank of the adult Muslim is superior to the Muslim boy. Since he obeyed as an adult. And the disbeliever being eternally in Hell is due to his disbelief.

If the boy were to say: O Lord of the Worlds, why did you deprive me of this lofty rank that you gave to the adult Muslim, and did not withhold it from him? If the answer were to be given: Because he obeyed as an adult. The boy would say: Why don’t you keep me alive until I reach puberty and obey, so that I may attain this rank? If the answer were: Because I knew that if you reached puberty, you would disobey me, so your extinction was most beneficial for you, and your descent to this rank is better for yourself.

(Then) the adult disbeliever can say: Why didn’t you cause me to die before reaching puberty, since you knew I would be a disbeliever upon reaching puberty? Thus, the one obliging purpose has no answer. This is conclusive evidence that the purpose is not necessary, and there is no doubt about it. (Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Amidi 631H, Abkar al-Afkar).

 

The Maturidi position

The Ashari and Maturidi schools of Aqeedah are both part of Ahl al-Sunnah. There are relatively few differences between them. When there is a difference, it is a valid difference within Ahl al-Sunnah. We should not treat such diversity as deviance.

Although it is often said that Asharis and Maturidi differ regarding the issue of Allah Most High’s actions having an Illah (علة) or Gharad (غرض), that does not mean every Maturidi differed with every Ashari. Nor vice versa. However, it is generally understood that the established Maturidi opinion differs with the established Ashari opinion.

أَفعاله سُبْحَانَهُ غير معللة وَإِن كَانَت صادرة عَن حكم مبينَة أَو مجملة وَمَعَ هَذَا فالحكمة الَّتِي بِمَنْزِلَة الْعلَّة الغائية فِي الْجُمْلَة هِيَ الْمعرفَة الإلهية كَمَا قَالَ تَعَالَى {وَمَا خلقت الْجِنّ وَالْإِنْس إِلَّا ليعبدون} أَي ليعرفون كَمَا فسر ابْن عَبَّاس وَغَيره. (الرد على القائلين بوحدة الوجود)

His actions, glory be to Him, are not caused, even if they are based on clear or general wisdom. However, the wisdom that is like the purposed cause in general, is divine knowledge. As the Most High said: I did not create the Jinn and mankind except to worship Me. (Surah al-Dhariyat: 56). Meaning to know, as Ibn Abbas and others explained. (Imam Ali al-Qari 1014H, al-Radd ala al-Qaileen bi Wahdatu al-Wajood).

In the above Nass, Imam Ali al-Qari seems to diverge from the Maturidi position. Since he negates Illah (علة) for the actions of Allah (Most High). However, he does immediately affirm wisdom. Once again clarifying that taking that position does not dictate denying wisdom (Hikmah). In the following Nusoos (texts) we have Maturidi Imams sticking to the standard position.

وَهَذَا مَبْنِيٌّ عَلَى أَنَّ أَفْعَالَ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى مُعَلَّلَةٌ بِمَصَالِحِ الْعِبَادِ عِنْدَنَا مَعَ أَنَّ الْأَصْلَحَ لَا يَكُونُ وَاجِبًا عَلَيْهِ خِلَافًا لِلْمُعْتَزِلَةِ، وَمَا أَبْعَدَ عَنْ الْحَقِّ قَوْلَ مَنْ قَالَ: إنَّهَا غَيْرُ مُعَلَّلَةٍ بِهَا فَإِنَّ بَعْثَةَ الْأَنْبِيَاءِ – عَلَيْهِمْ الصَّلَاةُ وَالسَّلَامُ – لِاهْتِدَاءِ الْخَلْقِ، وَإِظْهَارَ الْمُعْجِزَاتِ لِتَصْدِيقِهِمْ فَمَنْ أَنْكَرَ التَّعْلِيلَ فَقَدْ أَنْكَرَ النُّبُوَّةَ وقَوْله تَعَالَى {وَمَا خَلَقْتُ الْجِنَّ وَالإِنْسَ إِلا لِيَعْبُدُونِ} [الذاريات: 56] وقَوْله تَعَالَى {وَمَا أُمِرُوا إِلا لِيَعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ} [البينة: 5] وَأَمْثَالُ ذَلِكَ كَثِيرَةٌ فِي الْقُرْآنِ، وَدَالَّةٌ عَلَى مَا قُلْنَا، وَأَيْضًا لَوْ لَمْ يَفْعَلْ لِغَرَضٍ أَصْلًا يَلْزَمُ الْعَبَثُ. (التوضيح شرح التنقيح)

This is based on the fact that the actions of Allah Most High are based upon the interests of His servants, according to us, even though the best is not obligatory upon Him. This is contrary to the Mu’tazilah. How far from the truth is the statement of those who say that they are not based upon them. Since the mission of the Prophets (May Allah bless them and send them peace) is for the guidance of creation. Also, the manifestation of miracles is to confirm them.

Whoever denies the reason has denied prophethood. And the Most High’s statement, I did not create the Jinn and mankind except to worship Me. (Surah al-Dhariyat: 56). And His statement, And they were not commanded except to worship Allah. (Surah al-Bayyinah: 5). There are many such examples of this in the Qur’an. This is indicative of what we have said. Also, if He (Most High) did not do it for a purpose, then it would be futile. (Imam Abaydillah bin Masud 747H, al-Towdeeh).  

واستدل به من قال بتعليل أفعال الله تعالى بالأغراض كالسلف والماتريدية، ومن يأبى ذلك يجعلها لام العاقبة. (روح المعاني في تفسير القرآن العظيم والسبع المثاني)

It was used as evidence by those who said that Allah Most High’s actions are explained by purposes, such as the Salaf and the Maturidis. Those who rejected that, deem it the lam of consequence. (Imam Shihab al-Deen al-Alusi 1270H, Ruh al-Ma’aani).

Purpose of the Prophets

When the Maturidis opposed the Asharis for claiming that the actions of Allah Most High do not have علة or غرض, they did not tend to say Asharis deny wisdom. Rather they said it renders important matters such as sending Prophets futile. Which is a strong argument against the Ashari position.

وهذا مبني على أن أفعال الله تعالى معللة بمصالح العباد كما هو جمهور مذهب المحدثين وجمع من الفقهاء محتجين على ذلك بأن خلق الثقلين للعبادة وبعثة الانبياء لاهتداء الخلق وجواب المخالف أن العبادة والاهتداء غاية الخلق والبعثة وحكمتها واستعارة لام التعليل للعاقبة شائعة في كلام الله تعالى وحديث الرسول عم. (تغيير التنقيح لابن كمال باشا)

This is based on the fact that the actions of Allah (Most High) are purposed by the interests of His servants. As is the position of the majority of Hadith scholars and a large group of jurists. They argue that the creation of the two was for worship, and the mission of the Prophets was for the guidance of creation. The response of the opponent is that worship and guidance are the purpose of creation, as is the sending of Prophets, and their wisdom. The use of the lam of explanation for the consequence is common in the words of Allah Most High and in the Hadith of the Messenger ﷺ. (Imam Ibn Kamal Basha 940H, Taghyeer al-Tanqeeh).

إمَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ مِمَّنْ لَا يَعْتَبِرُ الْمَصَالِحَ فِي أَفْعَالِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى كَمَا هُوَ مَذْهَبُ الْأَشْعَرِيَّةِ وَعَامَّةِ أَهْلِ الْحَدِيثِ وَيَقُولُ لَهُ أَنْ يَفْعَلَ مَا يَشَاءُ كَمَا يَشَاءُ بِحُكْمِ الْمَالِكِيَّةِ مِنْ غَيْرِ نَظَرٍ إلَى حِكْمَةٍ وَمَصْلَحَةٍ أَوْ يَكُونَ مِمَّنْ يَعْتَبِرُ الْغَرَضَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ فِي أَفْعَالِهِ كَمَا هُوَ مَذْهَبُ عَامَّةِ الْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ. (كشف الأسرار شرح أصول البزدوي)

Either he is one of those who do not consider the benefits in the actions of Allah Most High, as is the doctrine of the Ash’aris and the majority of the people of Hadith. He says: It is for Him to do whatever he wants, however he wants, due to ownership. Without consideration for wisdom or benefit. Or he is one of those who consider purpose and wisdom in His actions, as is the doctrine of most philosophers (Mutakalimeen). (Imam Ala al-Deen al-Bukhari 730H, Kashf al-Asrar).

 

Conclusion

Muslims should not delve into matters that do not focus upon the praise and glorification of Allah (Most High). Too often, sectarian Muslims focus on issues that have no positive answer. This is a grave error. However, the fault is with the one who raises it not the one who responds.

A discussion regarding the actions of Allah Most High having an Illah (علة) or Gharad (غرض) is not beneficial. Rather it takes one away from magnifying the praise of Allah Most High. Both answers to this question have their positives and negatives. So why delve into it?

Rather Muslims must focus upon what is clear in Quran, Sunnah and the way of the Sahabah. This is always important. But when it comes to matters of creed (Aqeedah) it is vital. Keeping Aqeedah simple is fundamental to flourishing as a religious community.

The claim that Asharis deny wisdom in the actions of Allah Most High is not upheld. However, it is true to say that some of them have asserted things that can lead one to come to such a conclusion. As Sunni Muslims we should have no problem with distancing ourselves from problematic or confusing statements. Irrespective of which scholar said made them.

And Allah Most High Knows Best.

–Answered by Shaykh Noorud-deen Rashid (23.09.25)