Working Group Retreat 3 – November 22-23, 2014

Working Group Progress and Update – Dr. Aasim

Goals of this retreat:- Review the first question – can scientific notions of risk and theologicalconcepts of necessity work together to create a schema of human healthneeds?- Abstracts submitted to March conference for papers #1 and 2 (Papers need to be complete by March 15)- Move into question #2 (soul).

Looking forward:First product at PMR conference in March

Paper presentation - Ontology, epistemology – Dr. Ahsan and Sh. AminPanel – “Risk” between jurists and scientists -Sh Omar and Dr. Padela

Maha can get author instructions for specific journal to guide writing.

Retreat 4 – Jan 24/25 – Need abstracts/outlines for two more papers to present at ISNA- These papers will be presented at ISNA in September to publicaudience and scholarly audience - r/t second question: neuro-scientific understandings of brain andconcept of soul.

Retreat 5 – PMR, BostonRetreat 6 - September - ISNARetreat 7 - 2016 (Spring) – Symposium (Chicago)

- Thinking to do larger conference rather than a smaller one in Fall,2015; get sponsorship from other orgs. - Turn into edited volume.- Presentation of results of working group; invite other scholars tocritique them. - If we are engaging with others who work in similar areas we caninclude them in conference and include their papers in the book.

Year 1 report to be submitted to Templeton- Outlines of papers- Sign in sheets- Proposed abstracts- Notes from meetings

Review of Epistemological Terms from Retreat 1 – Sh. OmarObjectives:

- Definition of common terms- Definition of the intellect- Degrees of certainty

Definition of ‘ilm – knowledge- Used differently in various contexts- Theologians: perception of an object corresponding to reality.

- Coherence is a necessary, but not sufficient condition- Correspondence is necessarily coherent

- Contrast with contemporary Western philosophers (Hume, Kant, etc.) whohave relativistic definitions of knowledge and/or posit that correspondenceis not possible.- the idea of correspondence is assumed by science; nature exists and is knowable.

2nd term: I’tiqaad – degree of confidence/belief in a proposition- used in Arabic to refer to doubtful things, but the early usage was for things thatone is certain about. It covers the spectrum of degrees of certainty.- subjective understanding of the term - may or may not correspond toknowledge (e.g. Christians have I’tqaad re: trinity).

Yaqeen – certainty. The opposite cannot be true. 100%Thun rajiH – likely to be true. Probable proposition – 51-99% probability

Supposition. Much of fiqh falls in this areaShakk – uncertainty - doubtful proposition – 50%Waham – Erroneous proposition – 1-49% probability of truthfulness – most likely this is not true (this is in contrast to the usage of this word in Sufi literature - delusion/imagination)BaTil – absurd, false – not c/w reality. Invalid

‘ilm is the thing in itself and it is objective. From an objective perspective, if your conception corresponds to reality it is yaqeen; if not it is baTil. From a subjective perspective, the scale is about your degree of certainty.

What can we know with yaqeen?First principles – al-awwaliyaat

(e.g. cause and effect, identity, excluded middle, non-contradiction)Basis of all rational thought; linked to maqasidScience also accepts first principles

Internal sensations – mushahadat- sense of hunger, incorrigible (nobody can tell you that you are not)- sense that you exist

Empirical observations – mujarrabat- some can be known with yaqeen – e.g. gravity on earth, (a scientific fact)

Reports transmitted through multiple people – khabr saaliH- with conditions for the reports in order to achieve certainty

Intuitive observations – Hadasiyyat- example knowing that the moon’s light is not from its own source

Observations made by the external senses - maHasusat

Fiqh rulings can take into account things that are known with yaqeen as well as Thun ar-rajiH - e.g. prayer times are acceptable without yaqeen.

Re: scientific research – what can we make policy on? e.g. brain death?In shari’ah - When do we bury someone? Their life is yaqeen but we only have to have Thun ar-rajiH to bury them; however, La yazullu bi as-shakk – We can’t have uncertainty.

Standard definition of the intellect – See handout Definitions are problematic – ‘aql, ruh, nafs, qalb Al ‘aql – (intellect) – per Imam Taftazani – famous, broadly accepted

– it is a quwwah – faculty of the nafs (meaning the ruh – the soul, spirit); (meaning an-nafs an-naTiqah – the rational soul). - By this faculty the soul has the capacity to obtain knowledge/perceptions. – This faculty exists from the onset of its existence- But knowledge is not necessarily obtained just because it has the faculty- Knowledge is obtained through physical development, use of senses

- therefore perfection of intellect depends on development of body

(Fairuzabadi): The quwwah is nurun rabaniyyah (a spiritual light) by which the nafsperceives knowledges… Implication of light = faculty granted by Allah thatsheds light on the object of knowledge…

There are other definitions of ‘aql:- One weaker opinion – a substance by which one may arrive at/realizethings that are imperceptible by means of intermediate things that areperceptible.

This is important with r/t problem of consciousnessThe most useful one is that the genus is quwwah – we don’t need to talk about the soul, we just have to prove..

The distinction between “faculty” and “substance” has radical implications in relation to philosophy of mind. The second definition posits that there is a separate entity. E.g. mind is different than soul rather than a faculty of the soul, which is the substance.

This is ‘aql as defined in the science of kalaam: In fiqh it is different – who is a mukallaf?

Considerations of harm: The concept of darar, dirar and its related qawa’idSh Jihad

(Harm within the context of universal maxims of jurisprudence)

Terminology – principle vs. maxim = qa’idah?

Five major universal maxims (al qawa’id al-kulliyah al-fiqhiyyah al-khams):1. Matters are to be evaluated in terms of their objectives or purposes (what you were

aiming for when you began).2. What is certain cannot be removed by uncertainty. (Certainty is not lifted by doubt)3. Difficulty requires ease.4. Harm is to be removed.5. Custom is given arbitration status. Includes professional custom.

- These are part of fiqh – not part of ‘usool al fiqh- They are a way of indexing and categorizing the individual judgments of fiqh - Based on inductive reasoning – the idea of it being a kulli – or universal is that it is not a true universal but rather a qualified or inductive universal. It is relevant across a great many cases; however there are exceptions and cannot necessarily be translated to issues outside of the discipline of law.

Universals vs. particulars (Juz’ii):- Hallmark of Islamic reasoning – distinguishes it from other cultures (existedprior to Islam as well; e.g. Plato)- The trend in academia is to dismiss idea of universal – but there are stilldebates at the higher levels of philosophy on this matter.- Kulli – a principle, judgment, ideal that has application across a variety ofcases.- Another reference to universals is the five maqasid of sacred law. Anyjudgment of sacred law should promote all or some of the maqasid andcontradict none.

These are the major five maxims of Islamic jurisprudence and some say that all judgments can be returned to these. There are more than a hundred.

In the discipline of legal theory in the chapter of analogy there are the maqasid = another approach.

One way to define shari’ah it is to look at its intents and purposes – maqasid or these five.

What is the role and purpose of the universal maxims?- They are not the hukm (judgment).- These are guides that get you to a conclusion on a case.- Not the rationale for the hukm but could indicate the rationale.

- They help to avoid contradictions in making judgments in real world cases.- It is a way of indexing what is happening in fiqh – where things are going on thatmay relate to a case.- It can be a starting point for analysis, but the judgment will be based on an

analogy to a particular ruling underneath the relevant maxim.- It allows the faqih to sort through these things and cut across abwab – e.g.

from business to medicine - It is not the “new ‘usool”. That is one extreme and being very mechanical is

the other and we are looking for the middle.- These five (and the field in general) were agreed upon between the 6th-8th C.- These instruments made it possible for someone to draw out rulings in new casesin real world ifta’.- Makes the faqih more comfortable about how he is arriving at his decision.- These maxims will clarify within groups of rulings that may be from disparatechapters, a single rationale in the heart of them all.

You could use the maxims from the beginning or the end of the process. At the end you they are used as a test to see if the ruling is consistent with the maxims.

Prominent maxims related to issues of harm:1) La Darar wa la Diraar. Based on hadith – a hyperbolic form that means literally there is to be no harm. We are responsible to ensure that it does not happen and if it happened that we are to remove it; and there is no reciprocation of harm with harm. Harm is never a solution to harm2. Al-Dararu yuzaalu. Harm is to be removed – an imperative of sacred law.3. Al-Dararu yudfa’u biqadar il–imkaan. A harmful situation that cannot be removed must be removed to the degree possible (if for example it can only be completely removed by means of more harm) in the measure made possible by the context.

- Certain things are excused in allowing them to remain that would not have been excused from the outset. (Another maxim). For example if we say it is wrong to put a cover over the graves of certain Muslims; if it was done anyway, it should not be removed rather than desecrate the grave)4. Al-Dararu la yuzaalu bi mithlihi. Harm is not to be removed by introducing another equal harm. 5. Al-Darar ul-ashaddu yuzaalu bi al-Darar il-akhaf. The greater harm is to be removed with a lesser harm.6. Idha t’araDat mufsadataani ruu’ii a’aThamahuma Dararan birtkaabi akhafihima. If there are two opposing detrimental situations then we control the one that is most harmful by allowing for/committing the one that is least harmful.7. YutaHammil ul-Darar al-khaSSi li dafi’i il-Darar il-‘am. A particular harm is tolerated in order to prevent a more general harm (includes imminent domain - private vs. public).8. Al-Dararu la yakunu qadiiman. Harm is never assumed to be pre-existent (the existing, natural state). It should not be accepted as the default – reinforces the idea that harm is to be removed.

Harms with which you have Thun al-rajiH are precedent over the ones that are just a suspicion.(taqaddam al-Maslahah al-ghalibah ‘ala al-mafsadah al-nadhirah wa la tatruk laha.)

When does a person have a right to decline treatment? If you have certainty that the treatment is effective then it is required.

Another important maxim:dar al-mufasidi awla min jalbi al-munafi’. Prevention of detriment or harm is given precedence over the procurement of benefits.

Any work we do here has to look very closely at what Darar is: - Damage, destruction, the causing of loss of a benefit, of possessions or body parts- Harm is a very relative idea- e.g. difference between hardship and inconvenience

Theory of Balancing Benefits and Harms: Us. Taha

Balancing of considerations of interests (muSaleH) and detriments (mufasid): what happens when they meet?

Sources: “Qawa’id al-Ahkam fi MaSaliH al-Anam”; Sheikh ‘Izzuddin bin Abdus Salaam (“The Principles of Ethico-legal Determinants Concerning the Interests of Humankind” - major book of qawa’id, known as “al-qawa’id al kubra”)

“Qawa’id as-Sughra” (Abridgment of the above).

Terms that are used: - ijtama’a (coming together). Three logical pairings:

- mafsadah – mafsadah - maSlaHah – maSlaHah- mafsadah – maSlaHah

- ta’aruD – conflict/tension. Another way of describing the meeting of interests/detriments.- a’tham/akhaf – greater, lesser- ‘amm/ khaSS – general/specific (may relate to but not synonymous with public/private) - ghalibah/naadirah – predominant, often/rare - apply to issue of combination/conflict - raajiHah/marjuHah – preponderant/probable

Some ways to characterize a matter according to the above:1. By the common sense of people. People with a healthy intellect/nature are created

with a pretty good idea with r/t dunya of what is beneficial and harmful.2. Experience of people (individual experience) is taken into consideration (khibrah).3. Expert opinion (ahlul khibrah).

Then given these things the conditions from the qawa’id come in:Qawa’id that apply to the calculus of a conflict between detriments and interests:

(all of the qawa’id have limits/restrictions of applicability)

Mafsadah-Mafsadah- idha ta’araDat mufsadatani ru’ia a’Thamahuma Dararan birtikabi akhafihima.

When two detriments are in conflict (one will happen – there is no third option) we safeguard consideration of the greater of the two by committing the lesser of the two. By committing the lesser of the two one is dealing with/deflecting the greater harm.

- mafsadah – pain, anxiety, and what leads to them - is the super-category of:

Darurah (necessity), mushaqqah (discomfort), haraj (difficulty), Darar (harm)- thus Darurah is not required for something to be a mafsadah- linguistically Darar is the closest in meaning to mafsadah

- This addresses pairing of mafsadah-mafsadah- they are either equal or one is greater. - if they seem equal it is probably due to observer’s inability to distinguishstrength of harm.

MaSlaHah – MaSlaHah- Same as above. Losing a MaSlaHah is a mufsadah

Mafsadah - MaSlaHahThis is important because over-simplified utilitarian consequentialist ethics dominate modern ethical discourse: “achieving the greater good”. People may misunderstand these maxims as evidence that Islamic ethics is simply utilitarian and that all we need to do is ask experts what the greater good is.

Shari’ah can be described as a hybrid deontological/consequentialist system but it is not purely consequentialist unless one considers:

a) Consequences occur in both dunya and akhirah.b) Allah has perfect knowledge of what is mafsadah/MaSlaHah and we don’t.

Dominant principle with mafsadah/maSlaHah:- dar’ al-mufaasidi muqaddamun ‘ala jalbi al-muSaliH.

Deflecting harm is given precedence over achieving interests.

- taqaddam al maSlaHah al ghalibah ‘ala al-mafsadah al-naadirah wa la tutruku laha.Preponderant incidents are given preference over rare detriments and are not omitted in deference to the former. (e.g., you do the former even though the latter exists)

- ghalibah/naadirah (preponderant/rare) is a means to compare competing interests and detriments: How much of the population is affected by each?e.g. if a treatment benefits the majority of people and a few have side effects.- This is seen as an exception to the general maxim above.- Ghalibah - nadhirah – relates to frequency- A’tham – akhaf (shiddah)– relates to severity- Expert testimony may r/t levels of frequency, severity, benefit/harm. His opinionshould be considered but but this does NOT mean that the expert (e.g. doctor) canarrive at a hukm independently unless he is also a faqih.

- mura’at ul-maqaSidi muqaddamatun ‘ala ri’ayat il-wasa’ili abd’an.Consideration of the objective is preponderant over consideration of the means.Means/objectivesThere are two types of consideration in shari’ah

- the objective of the action- the means for achieving the objective

When you have a conflict between them, and you cannot reconcile them in any other way, then preference is given to the objective; but one must be carefulThis is why qawa’id cannot replace the ‘usool – it would be too easy to wind up in error.- There are exceptions, e.g. not being able to eat dead human flesh to save your life.- Qawa’id are to be used when the text is not explicit.- al-iDTiraru la yabTalu Haqq al-ghairi. Being in a situation of exigency does not void the shari’i right of another. Limits the maxim above.

MaSlaHah and Manfa’a (Utility); Hanafi Perspective – Sh. Amin

Difference between istihsan and maSlaHah:-Istihsan (Juristic preference) is based on evidence – not public interest or equity

- giving preference for one daleel over another. - if there is nass then there is no ruqsa for ijtihad– the daleel in istihsan is a subtle qiyas or something stronger than qiyas inHanafi madhhab. -E.g laughing loudly in salat – the qiyas was that it should not break wudhu but only the salat.– there was a Sahabi who commented on this saying it breaks wudhu also. - Abu Hanifa arrived at his conclusion via istihsan: he preferred this Sahabi’sstatement over qiyas; stating that the sahabi would not have said this basedon his discretion only.

Example: Difference between obvious and not-so-obvious analogy:- in the case when animals are gathering around a watering hole and some areimpure, you cannot make wudhu with this water. If a bird of prey drinks fromthe water then what?- 1) analogy between wild beasts and bird of prey as there is evidence in hadithsaying that if wild beasts drink from the water, the water is impure- 2) more subtle analogy – when animals drink they do so with the tongue but whenbirds drink it is with the beak which is like a spoon and it is not najas – This subtle analogy is what is known as istihsan – using this we say that if birds ofprey drink from the water it will remain pure.

This is unfortunately confused with maSlaHah – Hanafi consider MaSlaHah secondary; it is not ‘usooli or a primary legal proof. If the faqih does not find evidence in the case, he may use MaSlaHah.- Hanafis don’t like to combine them. Istihsan is a daleel shari’I and maSlaHah is not.

MaSlaHah in The Hanafi madhhab resides in the opinions of the fuqaha in their advice to rulers – not to a faqih (mufti) who deals with issues at lower levels.

- Whatever the ruler does for the community it has to be upon the preponderance ofa benefit - Example: Umar made a decision to pay three people different salaries based on a

maSlaHah even though Abu Bakr refused to do this. – This is evidence to support the use of maSlaHah according to contexts.- MaSlaHah is a tool for the governor to administrate and govern.

Distinction between the utilitarian and ‘usooli approach = important question:

Preliminary comments:- There cannot be sin (ithm) in a decision (hukm). - This is how you incorporate your idea of consequentialism if you say that the akhirah is part of the manfa’a (utility).

- e.g. permission to eat dead meat if you are starving : - there is a benefit in the dunya AND no sin in the akhirah- Saying that there is no sin in something because of Darurah does not makeit halal. It remains haram. - The difference between maslaHah and Darurah is that in maslaHah therecan be no sin; but with Darurah the sin may be lifted for the individualtemporarily.

-in maslaHah the act remains haram; with Darurah it becomestemporarily permissible.

Is this all just semantics? - From the ‘usooli approach the act is not allowed – permission is based on Darurah. - The permission is based on contingency and this is separated from the law.

It is an exception to the law; it is not the law.Example: a person seeks an opinion from a mufti who decides the person may havean organ transplant. How will he write his opinion? - He may: 1) consider it halal, or 2) out of Darurah, or3) there is no sin involved, or4) it is okay for the whole community, or 5) there is generalized hardship making itpermissible for everyone based on Darurah.- The mufti would not be able consider all of these points if he were to use a

utilitarian premise: the utilitarian has only one ‘usool: theoutcome/consequence.- Utility does not lead to the creation of law or legal principles or aconstitution.

- Therefore, MaSlaHah falls under the jurisdiction of the amir – - if the amir permits it the qadi etc. decide if it will be executed. Ibn al Nujaim says if it does not go against the shari’ah then it will beexecuted; if there is sin in it, the qadi will say “I cannot execute this order”

- In regard to Darurah, he would execute it as long Darurah is present.- The proof for the above: Ibn Nujaim – renowned Hanafi scholar - does not discussmaSlaHah as an independent issue in his book “al Ashbah wa al-naThair”.

- only states that it falls under the jurisdiction of the ruler.- When we study bioethics and philosophy we must appreciate that the early fuqahawere involved so closely with the political leadership they had to think at the levelof maSlaHah, not simply at the level of Darurah. - This is different today. People make the mistake of isolating the ahkam of shar’iahfrom the whole process of sultanate.

How do we tackle the utilitarians?

- Most Muslims believe that those laws that are revealed by the Lawgiver are divine.- as opposed to those who believe that all of shari’ah is divine, e.g. Dhahiri’s

- Maturidi’s believe that it is possible to distinguish good from evil without revelation in matters other than ‘ibadah – for ‘ibadah (e.g. how many times to pray) you need wahy.

- Mu’tazili’s would say all matters of good and evil are accessible to human mind.- ‘Ashari’s say that human needs revelation to distinguish good and evil in all cases.

-‘Usooli’s will search for rationale – cause for a hukm- Premise is that all ahkam of shari’ah are mu’alah (reasoned)-This is where istihsan comes in.

- for qiyas you need to figure out what is the ‘illah – what is the governingfactor in this hukm that we can extend to another hukm

Example:- If you have a set of governing rules such as the US constitution, then your subsequent arguments will all have to follow the rules of constitution.

- The primary discussion is whether or not a particular ruling is constitutional; notwhether it will achieve a desired outcome.

- This is consistent with the ‘usooli approach – the ‘usool are analogous to the articles of the constitution. All legal rulings must be consistent with the ‘usool regardless of utilitarian considerations.

Key point – all Muslims would say that on a policy level, the utility of act does not matter if that matter has been revealed. If there’s sin in it you don’t do it regardless of utility.

Discussion:Hanafi’s don’t like to “micromanage” dunya affairs, so many acts are mubah. Abu Hanifa was careful not to attach spiritual benefit to an act if there was no naSS to support it. E.G found no evidence that aqiqah was mustahab so he said it was mubah.

Most of the maSalah will be mubah to begin with. If there is a maSlaHah in introducing a certain vaccine then if there is no ‘ithm there then fine. If you are sick it is not wajib on you to seek cure from physical medicine.

Conditions upon which you will sin if you leave off medication/treatment:- You will die- You will lose an organ- You will infect others

- It is not wajib to seek the opinion of a physician. (one does not have to ask a person for water before doing tayamun)- Basis of ruling - the expectation of death if there is no treatment is ghalabat al Dhann.

Group work on paper #1: Health Risk Assessment: Examining the similarities between the reasoning exercises of medical experts and Islamic legists(See proposed outline)Q – Can we change the example from hajj to whether there is a legal obligation for a Muslim to seek treatment?A –- Focus of the paper cannot be fiqh for Templeton, although we could write another papere.g.: What are Hanafi opinions on “taking the means”?- We can use this fiqhi example to demonstrate the key concepts/terms (necessity, risk, etc.) and how they are used in each discipline to compare and contrast.

- Examples of treatments where there is certainty vs. ghalabat al-Thunn- Where does science enter the equation in terms of obligation; where is there atheological response that you cannot ignore regardless of what science says?- There has to be some philosophical framing that makes it a question of theologyrather than just ethical analysis.- Emphasize what informs how we deliberate.- Use this as an example to see how jursits conceive of this issue? - Bring in the notions of risk that are medical and statistical and see how they inform - Hajj – deals more with policy level decisions, maSlaHah and the issues Sh. Amindiscussed.

Ud. Omar will write direction of the paper, outline, who will fill in which section.

Hanafi perspective:- “If someone refuses a treatment until he dies he does not sin. There is no yaqeen

that this treatment will cure him. And it is not impossible that he would be cured without treatment.” (could not hear title of resource).

- Also Ibn ‘Abideen: Drinking out of thirst even if it is from haram or eating dead meat or that which is someone else’s property is obligatory. He must take only what is sufficient to relieve the necessity. If he abandons food and drink until he dies he has become disobedient. But if he leaves off treatment it is not sinful because of the above reasoning (Yaqeen).

Paper will also include Shafi’i perspective.

Terminology: Yaqeen either exists or it does not – there are no levels. If we want to talk about “levels of certainty” we need to use another word, perhaps ‘ilm or jazm.

Levels of existence and classification of sciences in Miftah al Sa’adah – Dr. Muhammed

Book moves from epistemology to ontology.– Importance of studying and teaching– Conditions of being a student– Duties of a teacher– Comparison of Tariq al-na ar (path of reflection) and Tariq al-ta fiyah (path of ẓ ṣpurification) - Which one do you take/which is more important for you?

- There are two types of knowledge: – Shahādah – external, perceptible world

- Experts are called ‘ulama- Ghaib – invisible world

- Method is direct observation (mushāhadah)- Experts are called Siddīqūn; knowledge obtained = ‘irfan

Knowledge of these is obtained through- ilm al- u ūlī – acquired through reflectionˁ Ḥ ṣ

– Seeking and bringing evidence. - Experts are called ‘ulama, knowledge from it is called ‘ilm

- ‘ilm al- u ūrī – acquired through experienceḤ ḍPath of reflection ( u ulī):Ḥ ṣ

- 4 modes of being:- Being in writing = lowest form (kitābah)- Being in words (i.e. as an utterance) ( ibārah)ˁ- Being in minds (meanings) (dhihnī)- Actual external existence ( aynī)ˁ

Organization of all kinds of knowledge known to Muslims (>300 “branches” on various “trees”) - Figurative existence: (wujūd majāzī)

- 1st tree – sciences r/t writing- Utensils of writing, rules, calligraphy, order of alphabet, etc.

- 2nd tree – Sciences r/t (alfā )ẓ- Semantics, derivation of words, grammar, composition, etc.

- Difference of opinion re: whether #3 = “wujūd haqīqī” or not – it is mental- 3rd tree – (existence in the mind)

- Logic, disputation, apologetics, etc.- Two approaches to study of a yān (sg. ayn): shar ī and ikmī. Hikmī approaches: (not ˁ ˁ ˁ Ḥbased on revelation)

- 4th tree - ikmah na arīyyah tree Ḥ ẓ- Medicine, veterinary science, botany, engineering, astronomy, etc.- Things studied for their own sake whether “basic” or “applied”

- 5th tree - ikmah amaliyyah Ḥ ˁ– Studied for some other purpose- Political science, ethics, economics, leadership, etc.

- Shari’i approach to studying reality: - 6th tree – Islāmī – using revelation by means of Tariq al-na arẓ

- ‘ulūm al shar iyyah – study of a yān based on al-qānūn al-Islāmī. ˁ ˁ- accepting what is in the Qur ān and sunnah as certain knowledge; thenˀusing ‘aql together with that to understand reality

- Path of purification (Tariq at-taSfiyah)- 7th tree – not na arī – different method – purification of soulẓ

– Based on his understanding of the soul: the person has two dimensions: – Physical from alam al-ajsām (sg. jism) ˁ- Soul (rū ) from alam al-malakūtḥ ˁ

The rū is put in the body as a steam that is placed in the heart. ḥ- the soul imprisoned in this dense body. -Is la īf it does not want to be there and it is put there forcefully. ṭ- Emanates from the body particular faculties (quwwah) to different parts of thebody. - Faculty of awareness/perception located in the brain emanates from the qalb.

The Tariq of ‘ilm for the rū (how does the soul learn):ḥ- From the mind through what it perceives with the senses ( ilm al- u ulī)ˁ ḥ ṣ

- Occasions of the u ulī – reflecting on sensory informationḥ ṣ- Ta awwuf – no intermediary (Wāsi ah)– ‘ilm al- u urī.ṣ ṭ ḥ ḍ

- Occasion of u urī knowledge – purification of the nafs from worldlyḥ ḍoccupations: like polishing a mirror to reflect reality accurately.

-The polished heart can get knowledge all of a sudden – kashf.- The na ar will only polish the reflection of the particular truth.ẓ- Therefore, mystic knowledge is more complete and perfect.

- u urī knowledge has two kinds:ḥ ḍ- Cut your nafs from what it is used to through spiritual training.- Attraction of the soul from the alam al-quds though purification by theˁintermediary of its love for the spiritual world.

– ilm al-mukāshafah

The hikmah part of this book is based on risālah of Ibn Sīnā; second part is based on al Ghazali’s i yā .ḥ ˀ

What kind of person should embark on which kind of study?- If you are over 60 use path of purification. You don’t have time for the other.- If you are young and stupid – they are forced by nature to path of purification- If you are young and smart –

- Those who are fortunate enough to find an alim above the level of taqlīdˁin a field – go to Tarīq al-na arẓ- Those who don’t have the high level teacher – go with purification.

Daruriat, haajaat, tahassiniat, their relationship with maqasid and the legal rulings of a thing – Sh. Omar

Resources – works by: Sheikh Ramadan al-Buti and Imam as-Shatibi

The maqasid that are generally accepted: Ad-din, an-nafs, al-‘aql, an-nasl, al-maal(religion, life, intellect, progeny, wealth)- Derived by means of istikraa’ – inductive reasoning

- from particular (juz’i) to general (Kulli) (Opposite of istikraa’ is deductive reasoning = qiyas al mantiqi)- Inductive reasoning is on the basis of aHkam as-shari’ah (rulings) to get tomaqasid.

- Rulings are different from maqasid.- Maqasid are not an independent source of law or hukm. -They are based on it, and the rulings are, in turn, based on the texts.

The Masalih or the Maqasid are not source of legal rulings. They are guides as to how legal rulings are to be applied.

- ‘Usool are the means by which the sources are interpreted and weighed to develop the ahkam.

- Qawa’id al fiqhiyyah – come from fiqh rulings and scripture

The shari’ah preserves (HifTh) the maqasid by means of: daruriyyat, haajaat, tahsiniyaat. - Daruriyaat – absolutely necessary or maqsid will be lost. Examples:

- Religion - saying the shahadatain; jihad- Life - the boundary between existence and non-existence. Allowances for eating, drinking, having a house. Dislodging something stuck in somebody’s throat using wine.- Progeny/lineage – marriage, procreation, taking care of children,zina laws - Property/wealth – permission for trade and limits upon it.

- Haajiyyat – the maqasid will exist but there will be difficulty in obtaining ormaintaining them.- Dispensations (rukhas)– without them life would be more difficult

- Example: not fasting when ill- Tahsiniyyat – Not having them will not entail hardship; they complement haajiyaat

- Virtuous character traits – keeping the awra covered. There is a minimum that is wajib: Therefore we cannot take these

things as an escape from shari’ah.- The tahsiniyyat are still at a very needed level.

- E.g. table manners – other adab matters – not luxury items.- The tahsiniyyat are still required (maTlubah); some are farDh.

These three categories are based on ijtihad: scholars may categorize things differently.

Can something be in the category of Daruriyyat and not be wajib?- This needs to be studied – and we should look at each category and what scholars

have cited for each category. This points to the Islamic conception of human needs.- Look at where the furuDh are in the tahsiniyyat.

At the end of the day these maqasid help us to understand the Hikmah of shari’ah and guide us re: how to apply them.

- Example what to do if there is riba in the marketplace? Should we close it because riba is haram?The marketplace is Daruri to produce/maintain wealth; thus, it should not beclosed.

What is the Human – Body, Soul ,or Ensouled Body – Sh Amin

Introductory notes:Methodologies

- Study nuSus- Understand the mutaqadimun – a higher level of knowledge

1. Allah showing someone the truth is different from the person may see or understand.Examples:

- Q - Is it possible to see Allah in this world? A - There is a difference between you seeing, and Allah enabling you to see. It ispossible that Allah may enable you to see what you otherwise cannot. - Ibrahim, AS, said to Allah – show me how you revive the dead. (Enable me). -Muhammad, saw, made du’a: “Allah show me the reality of things as they are”.

This is a broader request: it was accepted and thus we have the nuSus.

2. Use of the word “ruh”; the ‘alam al-arwah- To understand a thing we must look at all instances in Qur’an and ahadith- In Qur’an there are many ways that “ruh” is used.

I blew in him My ruh; I cast down My ruh…The angels and the ruh descend in it…

- Which ruh are you speaking about? Are there different types of ruh?- There is a realm of existence called ‘alam al-arwah (based on NuSus)e.g., Hadith – the arwah are all organized like armies. – This is where we start from in discussing what is the ruh.- The ruh is from ‘alam al amr, not ‘alam al-khalq.Evidence:- “Say that the ruh is something from the command my Lord”:Min amri rabbi means – from beyond the world of creation (from tafsir Ibn Arabi).- Allah says he has the khalq and the amr – the power to create and command.- ‘alam al-amr is from the world where creation takes place (al-‘Uthmani).- Knowledge of the ruh is little however the benefit of that knowledge may be great.

Coming to the idea of the ruh itself:- It has been said that 118 different opinions exist about the reality of the ruh and

they are all wasted; however, we need a position in these days, times, place. - Acc. to Ibn Arabi, this ruh comes from ‘alam al amr which is al mujarrad ‘alaal-huyulih (created without archetypal/primordial form).- There are three levels of the human being

Jism (at bottom); Ruh al-hayawani; Ruh ilahi (highest level)- Growth of fetus comes from ruh hayawani; ensoulment is of the ruh ilahi.- Once inserted you cannot differentiate among them.- Death = Separation of animalistic ruh from body. We cannot see this:

If the signs of death are very apparent then it is death. - The ruh ilahi remains in the barzakh and will still have some effect on the jism.– Its nature: fardani = lives in isolation if it wants to; it is a jawhar (substance).

- It is nuqTatun nuraniyatun – an illuminated dot - In the ‘alam al-mithal (non-physical world) you would see it as thefarthest point in the dimension of depth at the periphery of space andwhat is beyond it.- Likened to electricity – - Or like radio signals - the body is like the device that decodes themeanings and without it the signals are not perceived.

- Three types of jawahar –- physical jawhar - quantifiable, qualifiable - jawhar mithali - qualifiable but not quantifiable – e.g. pictures in a dream

- forms and realities without bodies; imaginal but not imaginary- jawhar mujarrad - that is neither quantifiable or qualifiable ; immaterial

- Comes from ‘alam al ‘amr. - Lives independent of any mithal or jism. - When it comes into a body then it assumes the body as its owner.

Takleef is on this body (not on the mithal, not on the ruh). e.g. no hukm shari’i on the still born – not named, notconsidered mukallaf until it breathes.

Sh. Amin’s conclusion: - The ruh is a jawhar, (in the tradition of the Sufis) – a created thing – a dot that is

nourani (illuminated). It exists independent of the body before and after human life and will come back when body is resurrected.

- The Qur’an uses the word ruh in different ways.- In order to distinguish among them you must establish the ‘alam al-arwah(world of the souls) as a separate ‘alam of the arwah ilahi or none of this willmake any sense.

- There are different levels of ruh associated with different levels of creation:- ruh nabati (plants) - allows growth but not instincts.- + ruh hayawani (animals)- + ruh ilahi (humans) The human intellect is related to the ruh ilahi.

The purpose of shari’ah is to refine the nasamah and thus can achieve perfection of ruh.

What is the word “nafs”? - Ali said the ruh comes out from the jism and has an attachment to it and that is how it comes back to it. - There is a close relationship between the ruh and the nafs and we are not sure how that is. -The nafs could be the ruh hayawani but there is a problem with that conception because on the Day of Judgment the nafs is the ruh ilahi and the jism. The ruh hayawani has no place in the afterlife. - In the classroom of ihsan, the soul/ruh is the higher inclination; the nafs is the lower beastial faculty that it needs to control. - In another classroom of kalaam soul would be nafs and ruh would indicate a substance or an idea (the tenuous vapor that pervades the body).

DiscussionForeshadowing of where we are going:

-Soul- Human/rational

Active intellectCognitive intellect

- AnimalPerceptive

External senses----- epistemologyInternal senses----- epistemology

MotiveArouser of movementActuator ------ neuroscience

- VegetativeNutritionGrowthReproduction

- Senses Sensitive receiverRational receiver

We talked about epistemology, levels of certitude which may have some correlation to the capacities /quwah of the soul – what can we interrogate? What can we know? How do we know it?Mapping of capacities of the soul and what type of knowledge it could interrogate.

Next: look at how neuro-scientific data can inform our understanding of what we think are parts of the soul.

Next time we will ask Faisal to discuss the neuro-scientific info;This may help us to bridge one of the gaps regarding brain death Can neuroscientific data inform our understanding of the ruh and when it is or is not present? Departure of what faculty from a neuro-scientific perspective is evidence of departure of the soul?

Jordanian “Ashkar” posited at an OIC conference that the soul is located in the brain.

There is also a correlate with issues at the beginning of life.

Discussion Points: - Western contemporary philosophy of mind – brain events occur in brain but mind is not located in the brain (mental events). They will not say that mind is seated in the brain. We need to look very critically/carefully at what Ashkar said. Aasim will share the transcript.

- Ahl us sunnah will not agree with this schema. Al-Ghazali would say that there is nothing in the religion that says that it should be rejected; it was based on their understanding at the time. We need to be clear where the schema we present is coming from.

- This comes from the book that is in our reading from Ibn Sina “Psychology of the Soul”. Laid out in Fazlur Rahman’s translation of the Najaat.

- If you were to cut off active intellect from the top what is below that is somewhat harmless, quite thorough and systematic; we can entertain it – it is speculative but it works. I would prefer to work directly from Ibn Sina. We would want to look out for secondary causality, which is a problem with Ibn Sina. The main problems start with active intellect and above. Doctrinally we do not accept active intellect and what is above it because it is neo-platonic secondary causality. If we interpret it as God’s direct causation of understanding then we could probably accept Ibn Sina’s schemata below that.

– Active intellect and above is neo-Platonic. It contradicts ‘usuli principles/violates Sunni ‘aqidah.

- Look at the part of the the Najaat called Avicenna’s Psychology – (trans. Rahman)

- We have to be careful how we present this within the tradition. Saying that mainstream kalaam position, position of ‘usool ad-din will find it not harmful is different than saying it has been or should be adopted. There is a lot of adoption. If we are going to include maqasid and qawa’id then we need to clarify that our tradition’s acceptance of this is not at the same level as their acceptance of maqasid and qawa’id. Even point out the neo-platonic issues, al-Ghazzali – lay that out and then say…for the purpose…we need a model of the soul and this is the one we will use. We have to position it with caveats. Identify where it lies in respect to authoritativeness.

- Purpose = destabilize the reductionist ways of thinking that we are stuck in – current level of discourse. Get the academy to engage with us. Also – destabilize modernist thought process of needing to re-originate our tradition – mapping western science onto it and rewriting it. E.g. making maqasid the new ‘usul.

– Read: Nature, Man and God in Medieval Islam by Baidawi, trans. by Calvary, edited by Pollack. Al Baidawi is representative of many imams. He pushes back on the neo-Platonic aspects of Ibn Sina’s work.

- Ghazali was right. I don’t accept Ibn Sina as a Sunni imam. His psychology is a theory that provides us with a working explanation that appears to work.

- We are using this model to map on various things – neuro-psychological functions; not discussing how God works in the world.

- The big picture is the intersection between scientific discoveries and theological realities. This model has controversy in it. Can’t we take something simpler and less controversial?

- This is not theology – it is philosophy and metaphysics.

Ontology of the Soul – Sh. JihadPoints of departure with the tradition

Overview:- Presentation from Cambridge thesis. - Purpose – set foundations of understanding to give us tools to answer questions.- Outline of thesis:

- Why is it hard to retrieve this understanding? Our imams did have clarity in the past; we stopped teaching the advanced texts of high kalaam around the 1930s.

- Theological reasoning collapsed into creedal statements without reasoning.- Positions taken by Sunni imams through history of Islamic sciences.

- Emphasis on transition in 12th C. with Imam al-Ghazali- Took a minority position on the human soul (“an-nafs an-NaTiqah”)that it is an immaterial substance.- Thereafter this became the majority position of Sunni kalaam.

- Definition of the positions r/t the soul- How do we demonstrate dominance?- Comparative discussions with contemporary debates in philosophy of mind

- Many contemporary philosophers advocate historically Islamic positions.- They argue against physicalists, naturalists; which is our challenge as well.- How do positions of our historical imams compare to contemporary ones?- We need to take a position/participate in these debates. How?

- What causes obscurity in retrieval of a clear position for Ahl as-Sunnah re: soul?- Overlap of different disciplines (tasawwuf vs. kalaam)- Differences in definitions of terminology:

- In Sufism: human soul = ruh; lower ego = nafs- In theology: human soul = nafs; ruh = unclear entity sometimes includedalong with nafs.

- One way of approaching it: ruh = tenuous vapor that pervades the human body – Allah creates life where it is there; or is it the

glue thatkeeps the body together with the soul?- This is consistent with what Sh. Amin presented (above) and with

Sh. Jihad’s conclusions. - Also position of many Turkish/Ottoman imams.

- In fiqh: Conversation did not occur; may discuss death = ruh leaving body.- Before Imam al-Ghazali even theologians used alternative terminology.

e.g. Al-Jawaini uses “ruh”; commentators understand it means “nafs”.- Historical perspective

- Before 12th C. (Before al-Ghazali until Jawaini)- Majority position among theologians: soul = subtle body (jism laTeef)- From the realm of physical things; its constitution is its subtlety

- Neither dense nor immaterial; from the world of the mulk- A tenuous vapor that pervades all of the extremities. - Like the oil is present in the nut; rose water in rose petal. - Mutahayyiz (with extension).

- This is different from the physicalists’ position; some orientalists areconfused about this point.

- Respected minority positions existed; e.g. it is an immaterial substance.- From al-Ghazali and beyond, majority position becomes: soul = immaterial.

- They say subtle body is majority position, in reference to prior imams.- In fact, the majority now accepts “the position of the philosophers”.

- The soul is non-physical; immaterial (ghair mutahayyiz)- Not accepting all that comes with that from the philosophers.- Critical of Ibn Sina; conscious of al-Ghazali’s critiques.

- Do not mention all of Ibn Sina’s schemata (above).

Purpose = clarity, have clear definition in order to engage w/philosophy of mind people. - Not to make a judgment on the subtle body vs. immaterial positions. - Book of al-Iji 15th c scholar is point of departure.

- Five most prominent definitions of the human soul.- Al-Iji mentions 10 different conceptions of the soul that represent 5 different ontologies. (Re: the 118 mentioned by Sh. Amin; many are redundant)

- How would they be framed in contemporary philosophy of mind?- Debate between substance dualism and monism.

Monism = absolute physicalism; physics can explain all reality. No ghaib.OR idealism e.g. Hegel.

Dualism = there is more to reality than what is covered by physics.1) Immaterial substance (jawhar mujarrad). Ghair mutahayyiz and baseeT

– A simple, non-physical, imperceptible substance with no extension in space. – The jawhar is the unifying substrate that bears accidents (properties, notsubstantive) – More than a property: a substrate that bears properties. – A substance is thing that does not inhere in another substrate; not a thingthat has no extension.

- This is the preferred ontology. - It is an existing minority position in Western philosophy – “abstract objects”. We are physical beings but aspects of us appear to be non-physical; e.g. emotions, mathematical equations.

2) Hylomorphism – al -huyulah wa as-Surah – very Aristotelian - Ether, prime matter free of defining form – the site that receives the form. - St. Thomas Aquinas – the soul is the form that gives shape to the huyula (matter). - Not accepted by Ashari or Maturidi kalaam. - Contemporary philosophers – Thomism – Eleanor Stump – like it because it purportedly solves problem of dualism – “composite”. - Flaw = you cannot have one without the other. Does not allow for postmortem life.

3) The soul as accident – non-essential attribute – ‘araD. Quality or faculty of the body. A quwah or combination of faculties – reduced to “soul functions” of grey matter. - Reduces the soul to a property of matter that cannot continue after death. - Popular solution among many people of faith and atheists in philosophy of mind. - E.g. “property dualism” addresses problem of non-physical consciousness.

Different properties of a single substance = physicalism – still a form of dualism. – May entail concept of supervenience – mind-body dependence; mind depends on physical characteristics. - Emergentism is a leading theory of this type – whole greater than parts = a way to avoid reductionism; but if you remove the physical, the soul cannot persist.

4) Single particle – al-jawhar al-fard (juz’) – acceptable in Islamic tradition - Soul = a single indivisible particle located within the physical heart (or elsewhere). – Mutahayyiz; Technically simple. –Resolves ‘unity of consciousness’ experience – multiple experiences, single subject. – How could the soul be a miniscule, physical, finite particle although it can encompass unlimited conceptions? (Baidawi’s argument).

5) Subtle body – jism laTeef – mutahayyiz (a physical thing); not a simple substance. Easiest for Muslims to understand – default position among the Muslim public. – Tenuously fine, anatomically dispersed throughout the body. - The Ruh = “Subtle bodies integrated into dense bodies. God has made it customary that the life of dense bodies is sustained so long as they are integrated with them.” (al-Juwaini).- Like fire in an ember, rose water in the rose petal, oil in the nut.- Respected opinion in classical Islamic theology.- Philosophical problems:

- Body-ness implies corporality and divisibility; not simple- Located in mulk; potentially perceptible

- Trouble explaining unity of consciousness; - No solution to “binding problem” in neuroscience – ability to integratedifferent perceptions into a whole.- Does not explain how soul endures after death.

#1, 4, 5 are possible in Islam. All mutakallamun in Ahl as Sunnah are atomists.

- Badraddin ‘Ayni says that the body of the human being is in the mulk and the soul including the intellect is at the same moment in the malakut.

- The human being is a barzakh – an isthmus between two worlds. - The neo-Platanists on the other hand have a sequential conception.

- Immaterial soul: - Allows for disembodied consciousness

– Hadith: The soul rises above the janaza and admonishes the family. - When a man gives salaams to a person in the grave whom he knew in the

dunya, Allah returns the soul to the person to respond.- Explains our access to faith/knowing divine.

- Philosophy of mind is the field where all discussion of soul/faith/belieftakes place – this concept is most useful in engaging in this discourse. - Some imams would speak of jism lateef to the public and intermediatestudents but dealt with this for the advanced.

We should not talk to the Muslim public about these ideas. Imams never did. This is not the place to talk about the reality of the soul (per al-Ghazali). The Ontology abstract – mapping the paper. Dr. Ahsan(see handout)

Focused on Allah, swt, as a healer. - Elements of cure – what cures? What are the causes and the means of healing? - Medical ontology vs. Muslim ontology; what are the gaps and the intersections?

- Spiritual (prayers, incantations, amulets, recitation)- Psychological (counseling, therapy, meditation)- Physical (drugs, surgery, radiation, exercise, nutrition)

- Mind-body treatments (Reiki, massage, acupressure)

Illness state – health - What is the proposed mechanism of action of counseling, mind-body, etc.?

- How does allopathic medicine understand it? - How do practitioners of alternative therapies see it?

- Medical ontology – bio-psycho-social (spiritual)- What does Muslim ontology add or do differently?

- Are we targeting something different?- Is the idea of targeting something the right approach?

Example – fever of unknown origin – this is a physical sign of some sort of malfunctioning. - From a medical perspective we seek the cause, try empiric approach, narrow it down. - Is there something that Islam brings to the table that expands the list of possible causes and cures or targets it differently?

- e.g. pain and suffering in one part of the ummah causes fever and sleeplessness…

- Causes – natural vs. supernatural. - Does medical ontology accept supernatural causes?

- Define natural/supernatural – does it imply the existence of God or someother-worldly being(s)? Something that cannot be explained via naturalsciences?

- What about Islam – Re: causality need to address occasionalism (at least in footnote)- Allah, angels, jinn, man, sins, good deeds, halal food, income etc.- What about Islamic medicine with its schema of cause and effects, healingmodalities, etc.?

Discussion:- What is meant by the term “spiritually unwell” from both perspectives?- Does medical ontology accept the concept of spiritual disease?- Is there room for concepts such as jinn possession, evil eye in medical ontology?- What is the “allopathic paradigm”? Does it allow for borrowing from otherparadigms to explain a cause?- Does the BPSS model allow for non-physical explanations of disease?

- Or does it only propose considering factors such as search for meaning inthe promotion of well-being?

- How does medical ontology explain/understand “spiritual support”?- As a form of cure? Curing what?- Does the existence of chaplains and massage therapists in hospitals meanthat medical ontology supports the possibility of other causes/cures ofdisease besides physical?- Or is medical ontology firmly based on the philosophy of naturalism?

- Outside of nature, which includes humans and their culturalcreations, there is nothing. Nature is self-originating. Every naturalevent is itself the product of natural events. All causes must be purelynatural causes.

- Need to be careful not to paint with too broad a brush - Allow for different movements in medicine; don’t create caricature - Provide evidence; define terms as used in each discipline (e.g.“Spiritual”).- Distinguish between what physicians believe (e.g. in miracles) vs.theory that underlies medical training.

- From the perspective of Muslim ontology- Include good deeds, sins, halal food (meaning)- What do we as Muslims bring to the table that is different?- We are not talking about the practice of Islamic medicine?- What does Islamic ontology contribute to our understanding of health andhealing?

- Consider Catholic and Jewish hospitals/medical schools vs. secular institutions- Other instances of incorporating spirituality in medicine as represented byPMR- What does Islamic ontology contribute/add to that?

- E.G – this is how Muslims think about these issues; we have notedthat this intersects with trends in modern medicine that increasinglyentertain…- Include what might relate to the role of family visitors.