The Series "Caliphate and Imamate in Islamic Thought"
By the Writer and Thinker Thaer Salama - Abu Malik
Episode Twenty-Seven: The Angles and Considerations That Must Be Discussed When Answering the Question: Who Has the Right to Legislate? - Part 1
The production of ideas and man's judgment of things and actions come from understanding their reality as it is? And then from the point of view in life that determines man's attitude towards things and actions, and without this point of view about life, man is not rising, so it is equal to him to eat everything as long as it satisfies the hunger of the stomach, so eating by stealing is equal, with eating by hard work, and killing is equal, so there are no values that deter man and do not define his behavior!
Therefore, the rising civilized person is not satisfied with realizing the reality of the apple that it satisfies hunger, and that it is not raw, or not ripe, in order to eat it, but his action precedes this point of view in life that shows him the reasons for owning it, and what is related to its ruling, so if it is permissible, he eats it!
To determine the position on the action: whether a person leaves it or does it, or is given a choice between doing it and leaving it, and to determine his position on things related to his actions, whether he takes them or leaves them, or is given a choice, we find that this position depends on looking at it through the following angles: the reality of the thing or action, the good and the bad, good and evil, praise and blame, reward and punishment.
a- His view of the thing or the action, (what is their reality?), does perfection and deficiency appear in the reality of the action or thing?
b- From the angle: good and bad, that is, through the following considerations:
The first consideration: suitability to human nature, to innate tendencies in humans, and to their purposes or aversion to them, for goodness is said: it is the suitability of nature, and ugliness is said: it is its aversion, as we say: rescuing a drowning person is good, and accusing an innocent person is ugly! And what agrees with the purpose is good, and what does not agree with the purpose is ugly, like killing Zaid in relation to his enemies and allies, for in the first consideration it is good, that is, suitable for the purpose, and in the second consideration it is ugly, that is, not in accordance with their purpose.
The second consideration: that goodness is perfection, and ugliness is deficiency, as we say: knowledge is good, and ignorance is ugly, meaning that it is a quality of perfection that necessitates raising the status of its owner, and ugliness is the thing being a quality of deficiency, meaning that it necessitates lowering the status of its owner who is characterized by it.
The third consideration: that goodness is deserving of reward and praise, and ugliness is deserving of punishment and blame.
It was said that the first and second considerations are for the mind! But this, even if it applies to some actions and some things, does not apply to all, for the lesson, as you have seen from the discussion in the previous two chapters, is not for merely issuing a ruling, any ruling, but for the correctness of the ruling, and its ability to treat the problem correctly!
As for describing actions as good and bad, it is in terms of judging them by humans, and in terms of punishment and reward for them, man gave himself the authority to judge the action as good or bad in comparison to things, for when he found that he was able to judge the bitter thing as ugly and the sweet thing as good, and the hideous shape as ugly and the beautiful shape as good, he saw that he could judge honesty as good and lying as ugly and fidelity as good and betrayal as ugly, so he gave himself the authority to judge actions as good or bad regardless of the issue of good and evil, which is not relevant to him in this case, (that is, the research here is from the angle of good and bad, not good and evil) and based on this judgment he placed punishments on the bad action and placed rewards on the good action.
So the correction of this judgment came that the action is not measured against the thing, for the sense perceives in the thing bitterness, sweetness, ugliness and beauty, so he can judge it, unlike the action, for there is nothing in it that man feels so that he can judge it as ugly or good, so it is not possible to judge it as good or bad absolutely from the action itself (and the fact that injustice is something that is praised or blamed is not something that man feels; because it is not something that is felt, so it cannot be understood, that is, the mind cannot issue a judgment on it.)
The action or thing is judged by feeling it, and this feeling is transferred to the brain to issue a judgment on it, so unless the action or thing is felt, it is not possible to issue a judgment on it, so it is not enough to issue a judgment on the action that a person instinctively feels aversion to it, or inclined to it, (some minds are inclined to adultery, and to drinking alcohol, so is their inclination enough evidence of the validity of performing the action or improving it? Where is the measure and where is the balance?!! And instinct may be affected by external factors such as culture, so the Westerner does not see "by his instinct" what the Muslim sees "by his instinct" as a result of changing balances and judgments as a result of external culture! And the influence of instinct varies in minds in strength and weakness, accuracy in understanding and vagueness! Then, if we hypothetically agree on the validity of instinct to be a measure and a source for describing the action as good and bad, as is their saying: knowledge is good, and ignorance is ugly, then bring and show us how instinct will judge the uglification or improvement of learning atheistic philosophy? Or on the uglification or improvement of a ruling or law related to joint stock companies?) The mind cannot judge it as good or bad, and therefore it is not correct for it to judge the action with praise or blame, so it must take this judgment from someone else, who is God Almighty. So here is the research in terms of judging the action and not in terms of its measure, and here is the research in terms of punishments for actions and rewards for them and not in terms of taking action on them and refraining from them, and therefore there was a difference between good and evil and between good and bad, and they were two completely separate studies.
