Al-Furqan: (15-16) Say, "Is that better..."

In this verse, there are several issues:

Issue 1: The Comparison

When the Almighty described the state of punishment prepared for those who deny the Hour, He followed it up with what confirms regret and remorse, saying to His Messenger: {Say, "Is that better, or the Garden of Eternity} which they should seek through affirmation of faith and obedience?

If one asks: How can one say, "Is punishment better, or the Garden of Eternity?" Is it permissible for a rational person to ask, "Is intoxication sweeter, or patience?"

We reply: This comparison is appropriate in the context of reprimand. It is like when a master gives his slave wealth, but the slave rebels, refuses, and acts arrogantly, so the master strikes him a painful blow and says, as a form of rebuke: "Is this [the beating] better, or that [the wealth]?"

Issue 2: The Proof Regarding Divine Promise

Our scholars used the verse {The righteous have been promised} as proof that reward is not obligatory upon God Almighty. This is because when someone says, "The Sultan promised so-and-so that he would give him such-and-such," this is understood as an act of favor (tafdil). If the giving were obligatory, one would not say he "promised" it.

However, the Mu'tazila also used this verse as proof for their doctrine. They argued that since God established this promise for those described by the attribute of piety (taqwa), the ordering of the ruling based on the attribute suggests causality. Thus, this indicates that the promise was established because of the attribute of piety. Since favor is not exclusive to the pious, what is exclusive to them must be obligatory.

Issue 3: The Meaning of Jannat al-Khuld (Garden of Eternity)

Abu Muslim said: Jannat al-Khuld is the garden whose bliss never ceases. Khuld (eternity) and Khulud (perpetuity) are synonymous, like shukr (thanks) and shakur (thankful). God Almighty says: {We wish no reward from you, nor any thanks} (Al-Insan: 9).

If one asks: Paradise (Jannah) is the name of the abode of reward, and it is eternal; so what is the benefit of saying {Garden of Eternity}?

We reply: The addition (idafa) can be for distinction, or it can be to indicate the attribute of perfection, just as one says "God, the Creator, the Maker." What is here falls under this category.

Regarding the Almighty's saying: {It was for them a recompense and a destination}, there are several issues:

Issue 1: Recompense (Jaza') and Desert

The Mu'tazila used this verse to establish the concept of desert/entitlement (istiḥqāq) in two ways:

1. The term Jaza' (recompense) only applies to what is deserved. A promise based purely on favor is not called Jaza'.
2. If Jaza' meant merely what they arrive at by virtue of the promise, then there would be no difference between saying {recompense} and {destination} (masir), resulting in redundant repetition.

Our scholars (may God have mercy on them) reply: There is no dispute that it is a {recompense}; the dispute is whether this recompense is established by promise or by desert. The verse does not indicate a specific determination.

Issue 2: The Fate of the Major Sinner

The Mu'tazila argued that the verse indicates that God does not pardon the perpetrator of a major sin in two ways:

1. The perpetrator of a major sin deserves punishment. Therefore, he cannot deserve reward, because reward is pure, lasting benefit devoid of harm, while punishment is pure, lasting harm devoid of benefit. Combining them is impossible. What is impossible to exist cannot be deserved. Thus, once deserving punishment is established, deserving reward must cease. If God pardoned the major sinner, He would either remove him from the Fire without admitting him to Paradise (which is false by consensus, as people on the Day of Judgment are either inhabitants of Paradise or Hell, based on {a party in Paradise and a party in the Blaze} [Ash-Shura: 7]), or He would remove him from the Fire and admit him to Paradise. This is false because Paradise is the right of the pious, based on {It was for them a recompense and a destination}. God made Paradise theirs and exclusive to them, and He made it theirs because it was a recompense for their deeds, making it their right. Giving one person's right to another is impermissible. Since all possibilities are refuted, pardon is impossible.

Our scholars respond: Why can we not say that the pious will be pleased if God admits those pardoned into Paradise? In that case, their entry would not be precluded.

2. The term al-Mutaqqun (the pious) in religious terminology is restricted to those who avoid disbelief and major sins. Even if we differ on whether the major sinner is called a believer or not, we agree he is not called Mutaqqi. Then, describing Paradise as {It was for them a recompense and a destination} implies exclusivity. It means it is the destination for the pious, and not for others. If so, the major sinner must not enter it.

We reply: The strongest implication here is that this generality serves as a stern warning (wa'id), which can be restricted by verses promising reward.

Issue 3: The Meaning of "It Was" (Kāna)

Someone might ask: Paradise will become for the pious as a recompense and destination, but why did God say {It was for them a recompense and a destination}?

The answer is twofold:

1. What God promises, in its realization, is as if it has already occurred.
2. It was written in the Preserved Tablet long before God created them that Paradise would be their recompense and destination.

Regarding the Almighty's saying: {For them therein is whatever they desire, eternally}, this corresponds to {And for you therein is whatever your souls desire} (Fussilat: 31). There are several issues:

Issue 1: Desires and Degrees

Someone might ask: If the inhabitants of the lower degrees witness the higher degrees, they will inevitably desire them. If they ask God for them and He grants them, then there will be no difference in rank between the deficient and the perfect. If He does not grant them, it contradicts the statement {For them therein is whatever they desire}.

Furthermore, if a father's son is in the lowest degrees of Hellfire and suffering the severest torment, and the father wishes God would save him from that torment, if God does so, it contradicts the eternity of the disbeliever's torment. If God does not do so, it contradicts {And for you therein is whatever your souls desire} and {For them therein is whatever they desire}.

The response is that God Almighty will remove such thoughts from the hearts of the inhabitants of Paradise. Rather, the preoccupation of each one with the pleasures he possesses will distract him from paying attention to the state of others.

Issue 2: The Condition of Eternal Bliss

The condition for the bliss of Paradise is that it be perpetual, because if it were to cease, it would be mixed with a form of sorrow. This is why Al-Mutanabbi said:

The greatest sorrow for me, even in pleasure, Is the certainty of its departure by its owner.

Therefore, eternity is considered in it, as He said: {For them therein is whatever they desire, eternally}.

Issue 3: The Exclusivity of Attaining Desires

The statement {For them therein is whatever they desire} serves as a reminder that the fulfillment of all desires occurs only in Paradise. Elsewhere, this does not happen; rather, in this world, comforts must be mixed with afflictions. This is why the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever seeks what has not been created exhausts himself and is not provided for." When asked what that was, he replied: "The joy of a single day."

Regarding the Almighty's saying: {It was upon your Lord, a promised duty}, there are several issues:

Issue 1: The Meaning of "Upon" ('Ala)

The word 'ala implies obligation. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever makes a vow and specifies its terms, he must fulfill what he specified." Thus, {It was upon your Lord} implies that this is obligatory upon God Almighty. Obligation (wujub) is that which, if left undone, the one who leaves it deserves blame for his action, or that whose absence is impossible.

If obligation means the first interpretation (that leaving it incurs blame), then leaving it is impossible, because leaving it implies deserving blame, and God deserving blame is impossible. Since the prerequisite of the impossible is impossible, that leaving is impossible. The impossible is not within the power of action, so He is compelled to act.

If the obligation means the second interpretation (that its absence is impossible), then compulsion is also implied, meaning God is not capable [of not doing it].

If one argues that this is established by the ruling of the promise: If He did not act, His true report would turn into a lie, and His knowledge into ignorance, which is impossible. What leads to the impossible is impossible, so leaving it is impossible, implying He is compelled to act. One who is compelled to act is neither capable nor deserving of praise and commendation.

The completion of the question and its answer: The action precedes the report about the action and the knowledge of the action. Therefore, that action is an action not based on compulsion; thus, He is capable and deserving of praise and commendation.

Issue 2: Promise vs. Desert

The statement {a promised duty} indicates that Paradise was attained by the ruling of promise, not by the ruling of desert, as previously established.

Issue 3: The Meaning of "Requested" (Mas'ūlan)

Several interpretations are mentioned regarding {requested}:

1. That the accountable beings requested it by saying: {Our Lord, grant us what You promised us through Your messengers} (Al 'Imran: 194).
2. That the accountable beings requested it by the language of their state (lisān al-ḥāl), because when they endured severe hardship in obedience to Him, this stood in place of a request. Al-Mutanabbi said:

   In the soul are needs, and in you is perception; My silence is speech to you, and discourse.

3. That the angels requested it by saying: {Our Lord, and admit them to the Gardens of Eden} (Ghafir: 8).
4. {A promised duty mas'ūlan}, meaning obligatory. It is said: "I will certainly give you a thousand, a wa'dan mas'ūlan," meaning obligatory, even if you do not ask. This is the view of Al-Farra'. The other views are closer to the truth, as Al-Farra's view is metaphorical.
5. Mas'ūlan means it is incumbent upon Him to be asked, because it is a necessary right, either by the ruling of desert (according to the Mu'tazila) or by the ruling of promise (according to the Sunnis).