A Divine saying addressed to Prophet David indicates this matter of determinism explicitly. It says: “Oh David, indeed you want and I want. But only what I want takes place. So, if you submit yourself to what I want, I will be sufficient for you over what you want, but if you do not submit to what I want, I will tire you out through what you want. Therefore, nothing shall take place except what I want.” It is clear from this Divine saying that determinism is emphatically declared. If you want to be effectual, you have to render your will to God—if you are His content servant, He will command things to obey you. If you have obeyed God, God will obey you. This is what is asserted in the Quranic phrase: “There, they will have whatever they wish, and We have more” (50:35). The way to get there is by adorning yourself with the qualities of lordship—by promoting the qualities of servitude (obedience, complacency, and submission).

Speaking of submission, the name (Islam) was derived from an Arabic word meaning “submission to the will of God”. In fact, ultimate Islam when achieved is a content and obedient submission. The imperative tense “submit” means surrender obediently and contently. That is, you submit to the will of God and know that He is the Willer and that your will is illusory. If your illusion abates by the gradation we mentioned earlier—by transitioning from a true event to a truer one in your pursuit of the Truth—you will know for certain that you do not have an effectual will, but the will belongs to the One. Thus you have to render your will to God and be content with His Will. “So if you submit yourself to what I want, I will be sufficient for you over what you want, but if you do not submit to what I want, I will tire you out through what you want.” In most of our affairs, in terms of that which transpires in our hearts, God addresses each of us by saying: “I will tire you out through what you want. Therefore nothing shall take place except what I want.”

The greatest illusion is the conscious will. It is the greatest idol. All acts of worship to other than God are in fact reflections of this will which has brought forth the question of determinism and free will. In fact, there are many people and existing sects and doctrines who believe erroneously. They claim that man consciously wills some of his actions. The backing of this claim can be obtained from the literal meanings of specific Quranic texts. In this way, proponents of absolute determinism have obtained their proofs from the Quran. Likewise, people who hold that man consciously wills some of his actions have obtained their proofs from the Quran. Arguments are refuted with other arguments as if the people involved are studying under two different schools and from two different books, not one single book. The secret, as we have said, is that the Quran follows their illusion so as to gradually and impreceptively transition man from illusion to certainty without disturbing him—without troubling him. The prophetic phrase is in effect, where he said that “People are asleep; when dead they will pay attention.”

As a matter of fact, there are also very great illusions of habit. These are the same illusions of conscious will, though they are of a customary nature. A very great one of them is in the matter of money; the custom is that our wealth is actually ours. That is because we are accustomed to the idea that we work, struggle, and tire in accumulating and managing wealth. So, wealth becomes ours. As everybody knows, when the Prophet moved to the heavenly companionship, a number of Moslems apostatized and thus faced death threats. They said: “We swear to God that we are Moslems, bear witness that there is no deity but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God; pray; fast; and go on pilgrimage, but we do not give our money. By God, this is exactly the tribute (that we will pay)!” What is customary and common practice, then and now and everywhere, is that wealth is ours. The Quran follows this illusion; it does not disturb us by disagreeing with the custom, so as to gradually guide us to understand that wealth belongs to God. The Quran, as we have said, is a book of dogma aiming at deepening the dogmatic faith. It does not contradict the intuitive custom that wealth belongs to people. Rather, it follows this illusion, as in: “Take from their wealth alms, you would cleanse them and purify them thereby, and pray for them; your prayer is a relief to them” (9:103). Although the Quran itself elsewhere says: “Give them of the wealth of God which He has given you” (24:33). It also says: “Spend of that of which He has made you trustees” (57:7). It may be noted here that two cases were mentioned. As disagreeing schools differ in opinion with each other and support their arguments from the Quran, it may be noted that the Quran in one place says the wealth belongs to God and in another place it says the wealth is yours.

Some people, especially the orientalists, entangled themselves in the mistaken assertion that the Quran is self-contradictory—that the Quran is inconsistent. A simplistic view—without thorough investigation of the Quran’s adherence to mental, sensory, and customary illusions—indicates that the Quran involves contradictions. Yet, there is no contradiction at all if we thoroughly study the issue. Here comes, for example, the command: “Do not let your hand be fettered to your neck nor extend it fully, for then you will sit down rebuked, regretful” (17:29). The theologians, for example, have set up well-established teachings on this command. It is said that we were commanded not to spend without restraint. As is well known, the Prophet was not a hoarder of money. He never hoarded up the livelihood of one day for future use. Yet, it is possible to hear the arguments of these scholars as they instruct you not to spend in profusion. In other words, hoard up your money. The first part of the verse “Do not let your hand be fettered to your neck” indicates clearly that you should not be stingy and tightfisted, as if your helping hand is tied to your neck and you cannot extend it to help. Whereas, the command in the second part says “nor extend it fully.” If this command had been the worthier of the two, the Prophet would have carried it out. The Prophet, however, did not carry it out. The secret is that the Quran follows people’s illusion—people’s fear of poverty. The Quran does not demand too much of them. The obligation of the Prophet in this regard is known—the Prophet knew it. It occurs at his level of monotheism. His level of monotheism prompts him to pass his financial concerns on to the reserves of God, and not to hoard what he has. Since people were not at his level, God did not demand too much of them. Rather, the Quran followed their illusion and fear of the future—fear of tomorrow if they woke up without stocked sustenance. The heart of the verse is in the phrase: “for then you will sit down rebuked, regretful.” If you sit down rebuked and regretful when you spend, because the level of your monotheism does not prompt you to pass your affairs onto God, you would be addressed by the verse: “nor extend it fully.” Since the Prophet did certainly not sit down rebuked and regretful when he extended his hand with all that was in his possession, his exclusive obligation becomes as if he was asked to extend it fully. This is what is asserted in the verse: “They ask you what they ought to spend. Say: That which is superfluous” (2:219).

The superfluous begins with the alms tax. The superfluous is the negligible thing that you can generously give away without feeling uneasy about giving. It is what you give from your wealth without coming to grief. The base or the minimum limit of superfluous is the alms tax. However, the Prophet elevated the concept of superfluous, in his exclusive obligation, to mean whatever exceeds present needs—the present moment’s needs. That is because the sustenance of his immediately upcoming moment is with God. Monotheism requires him to be more assured of that which is with God than of that which he would keep in store. Uttering the attestation “there is no deity but God” in effect requires man to pass all his concerns and his livelihood to God. Hence, the high-meaning of superfluous, to the Prophet, is whatever exceeds his present moment’s needs. To ordinary practitioners, superfluous is the customary dues existing in the alm’s tax. We carry on this conversation to show that the Quran, especially in the literal meanings of the Arabic words and text, lowers to these illusions—the sensory illusions that we furnished evidence for, as well as the mental illusions with regard to the question of conscious will.

We cited verses as evidence that the apparent meanings follow the sensory illusion given by eyesight: that the Earth is flat. Verses that we mentioned included, “the Earth We have spread out” (51:48), and “Who has made for you the Earth as a cradle” (20:53). We also cited as evidence verses following mental illusions, the illusory will we claim for ourselves; we believe that we have an independent will under our control. The verses we cited: “Whoever wills among you may take a right course. Your will is effectual only if it is the Will of God, the Lord of the worlds” (81:28-29). Furthermore, there are the very same illusions of custom represented in the matter of wealth, whereas the Quran states that the wealth belongs to the people. We cited this verse as an evidence of following these illusions: “Take from their wealth alms, you would cleanse them and purify them thereby, and pray for them; your prayer is a relief to them” (9:103). Although in another place it says: “Give them of the wealth of God which He has given you” (24:33). In this course of following illusion, we also cited evidence related to an issue with a very significant impact on people’s behavior. It is the issue of people believing that God commanded us not to spend without restraint. That is to say, He commanded us to spend some of our wealth. Yes, He commanded us to spend some of our wealth, yet this command is following our illusion. It is following the illusion represented in our belief that if we spent in such a way we would face poverty. Since our inner-selves are avaricious, He gradually urges us according to our capability. The verse we cited as evidence for that was: “Do not let your hand be fettered to your neck nor extend it fully, for then you will sit down rebuked, regretful” (17:29). These words are not directed to the Prophet because, as we said, the Prophet used to spend without restraint. Yet, if we had been asked to spend as the Prophet—if that had been our code, we would have despaired. We would have been in distress and hardship, and it would have been difficult for us to ascend the heights of religion. Actually, it would have been difficult to embrace religion in the first place. That is because the Quran says, “Inner-selves are swayed by avarice” (4:128), and “Whoever is saved from his own avarice, such are they who are successful” (59:9). So, the matter of obligation requires transitional phasing.

What is clear in this entire topic that we have discussed is that without collaborating with monotheism, the literal meanings of the text only mislead. In fact, they can veil the true meanings, and therefore can have a hindering and detrimental effect on monotheism. We carry on in this discussion that we started earlier, to substantiate that the apparent meanings of the Quran do not represent the true meanings of the Quran. Stating the fact that the Arabic language is incapable of conveying the true meanings of the Quran should not take such a long time, yet the focus on language is what people are accustomed to. Even some people express disapproval of our opinion that the Quran cannot be understood through Arabic language alone. However, meanings of the Quran are in fact wound up in the Divine Self. That is to say, the Quran is God Self. That is because the Quran is the word of God, whereas God does not speak in Arabic except when descending so that we can understand Him. In His Self, however, God’s speech is a quality of His Self. To say that the Quran is the word of God means that finitely it is God Self. This finiteness leads the Arabic words to carry their utmost meanings which wind up as signs as in the verse: “Alif Lam Mim. That Scripture, there is no doubt is a guidance for the pious” (2:1-2). Here, the pronoun “that” refers to the signs “Alif Lam Mim,” which we have discussed in our previous episodes.

When signs are the utmost of the spoken word it as if the sign is telling us: your aim is ahead. With the Arabic language, we can understand information received through minds. After all, the prerequisite for disciplined minds to exist is expressive language. As a matter of fact, expressive language is actually a production of our minds. It is the means by which the mind gives expression, and it has been devised for daily living and from the needs of daily living. Expressive language originated from the sounds we share with living beings and objects—from sounds produced by animals, as previously explained. So, the highest degree of articulate sophistication is no more than the highest degree of mental sophistication, and the mind has absolutely no ability to comprehend the Divine Self. It has absolutely no ability to fully comprehend the Divine Self. Rational proofs are indicators that the Divine Self exists, yet it is fully described by the attributes that are above the mind’s perception. As a matter of fact, the same goes for transmitted texts. Reasoning always develops from transmitted texts. However a transmitted text leads to the point where words fall short. That is to say, God Self cannot be described, identified, or named. It is ineffable. An example of the transmitted text that deems God far above description is: “Glorified be your Mighty Lord from that which they describe; peace be upon the Messengers; praise to God, the Lord of the Worlds” (37:180-182). The following with “peace be upon the Messengers” is because the Messengers are the greatest who described God—the Messengers are the most knowing who have described God.

Furthermore, the Messengers only described God with what He attributed unto His Self. The Messengers’ descriptions of Him, as with the ninety nine best attributes of God reported in the Quran, are not attributed by the Prophet unto God; rather they are the descriptions attributed by God unto His Self revealed to the Prophet. So, the meaning of “peace be upon the Messengers” is that they came with the most perfect description of Him. It is rightly said of His own Self-description that He is also bound by an ordinary perception. It is as if He is attributing unto His Self descriptions that we share with Him. For example, the seven Divine attributes revealed to us in the Quran (Alive, Knower, Willer, Abler, Hearer, Sighted, and Speaker) are God’s attributes and ours as well. We share attributes with Him. We are entitled to all of the ninety nine best attributes of God. Actually, they are primarily ours, while God’s entitlement to them is by conveyance because He is far above and too great for them. Yet, we can only know Him through what we know of our own attributes. We as living beings, when God speaks of ‘Alive,’ it comes to our minds as the concept of life; we as knowing beings, when He speaks of ‘Knower,’ it comes to our minds as the concept of knowledge; we as willing beings, when He speaks of ‘Willer,’ it comes to our minds as the concept of willingness; and thus the rest of the attributes. Hence, we would have not known Him if we were not similar to Him. For this reason, our attributes are similar to one another. His attributes and ours are similar—we are similar to Him.
A Divine saying addressed to Prophet David indicates this matter of determinism explicitly. It says: “Oh David, indeed you want and I want. But only what I want takes place. So, if you submit yourself to what I want, I will be sufficient for you over what you want, but if you do not submit to what I want, I will tire you out through what you want. Therefore, nothing shall take place except what I want.” It is clear from this Divine saying that determinism is emphatically declared. If you want to be effectual, you have to render your will to God—if you are His content servant, He will command things to obey you. If you have obeyed God, God will obey you. This is what is asserted in the Quranic phrase: “There, they will have whatever they wish, and We have more” (50:35). The way to get there is by adorning yourself with the qualities of lordship—by promoting the qualities of servitude (obedience, complacency, and submission).

Speaking of submission, the name (Islam) was derived from an Arabic word meaning “submission to the will of God”. In fact, ultimate Islam when achieved is a content and obedient submission. The imperative tense “submit” means surrender obediently and contently. That is, you submit to the will of God and know that He is the Willer and that your will is illusory. If your illusion abates by the gradation we mentioned earlier—by transitioning from a true event to a truer one in your pursuit of the Truth—you will know for certain that you do not have an effectual will, but the will belongs to the One. Thus you have to render your will to God and be content with His Will. “So if you submit yourself to what I want, I will be sufficient for you over what you want, but if you do not submit to what I want, I will tire you out through what you want.” In most of our affairs, in terms of that which transpires in our hearts, God addresses each of us by saying: “I will tire you out through what you want. Therefore nothing shall take place except what I want.”

The greatest illusion is the conscious will. It is the greatest idol. All acts of worship to other than God are in fact reflections of this will which has brought forth the question of determinism and free will. In fact, there are many people and existing sects and doctrines who believe erroneously. They claim that man consciously wills some of his actions. The backing of this claim can be obtained from the literal meanings of specific Quranic texts. In this way, proponents of absolute determinism have obtained their proofs from the Quran. Likewise, people who hold that man consciously wills some of his actions have obtained their proofs from the Quran. Arguments are refuted with other arguments as if the people involved are studying under two different schools and from two different books, not one single book. The secret, as we have said, is that the Quran follows their illusion so as to gradually and impreceptively transition man from illusion to certainty without disturbing him—without troubling him. The prophetic phrase is in effect, where he said that “People are asleep; when dead they will pay attention.”

As a matter of fact, there are also very great illusions of habit. These are the same illusions of conscious will, though they are of a customary nature. A very great one of them is in the matter of money; the custom is that our wealth is actually ours. That is because we are accustomed to the idea that we work, struggle, and tire in accumulating and managing wealth. So, wealth becomes ours. As everybody knows, when the Prophet moved to the heavenly companionship, a number of Moslems apostatized and thus faced death threats. They said: “We swear to God that we are Moslems, bear witness that there is no deity but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God; pray; fast; and go on pilgrimage, but we do not give our money. By God, this is exactly the tribute (that we will pay)!” What is customary and common practice, then and now and everywhere, is that wealth is ours. The Quran follows this illusion; it does not disturb us by disagreeing with the custom, so as to gradually guide us to understand that wealth belongs to God. The Quran, as we have said, is a book of dogma aiming at deepening the dogmatic faith. It does not contradict the intuitive custom that wealth belongs to people. Rather, it follows this illusion, as in: “Take from their wealth alms, you would cleanse them and purify them thereby, and pray for them; your prayer is a relief to them” (9:103). Although the Quran itself elsewhere says: “Give them of the wealth of God which He has given you” (24:33). It also says: “Spend of that of which He has made you trustees” (57:7). It may be noted here that two cases were mentioned. As disagreeing schools differ in opinion with each other and support their arguments from the Quran, it may be noted that the Quran in one place says the wealth belongs to God and in another place it says the wealth is yours.

Some people, especially the orientalists, entangled themselves in the mistaken assertion that the Quran is self-contradictory—that the Quran is inconsistent. A simplistic view—without thorough investigation of the Quran’s adherence to mental, sensory, and customary illusions—indicates that the Quran involves contradictions. Yet, there is no contradiction at all if we thoroughly study the issue. Here comes, for example, the command: “Do not let your hand be fettered to your neck nor extend it fully, for then you will sit down rebuked, regretful” (17:29). The theologians, for example, have set up well-established teachings on this command. It is said that we were commanded not to spend without restraint. As is well known, the Prophet was not a hoarder of money. He never hoarded up the livelihood of one day for future use. Yet, it is possible to hear the arguments of these scholars as they instruct you not to spend in profusion. In other words, hoard up your money. The first part of the verse “Do not let your hand be fettered to your neck” indicates clearly that you should not be stingy and tightfisted, as if your helping hand is tied to your neck and you cannot extend it to help. Whereas, the command in the second part says “nor extend it fully.” If this command had been the worthier of the two, the Prophet would have carried it out. The Prophet, however, did not carry it out. The secret is that the Quran follows people’s illusion—people’s fear of poverty. The Quran does not demand too much of them. The obligation of the Prophet in this regard is known—the Prophet knew it. It occurs at his level of monotheism. His level of monotheism prompts him to pass his financial concerns on to the reserves of God, and not to hoard what he has. Since people were not at his level, God did not demand too much of them. Rather, the Quran followed their illusion and fear of the future—fear of tomorrow if they woke up without stocked sustenance. The heart of the verse is in the phrase: “for then you will sit down rebuked, regretful.” If you sit down rebuked and regretful when you spend, because the level of your monotheism does not prompt you to pass your affairs onto God, you would be addressed by the verse: “nor extend it fully.” Since the Prophet did certainly not sit down rebuked and regretful when he extended his hand with all that was in his possession, his exclusive obligation becomes as if he was asked to extend it fully. This is what is asserted in the verse: “They ask you what they ought to spend. Say: That which is superfluous” (2:219).

The superfluous begins with the alms tax. The superfluous is the negligible thing that you can generously give away without feeling uneasy about giving. It is what you give from your wealth without coming to grief. The base or the minimum limit of superfluous is the alms tax. However, the Prophet elevated the concept of superfluous, in his exclusive obligation, to mean whatever exceeds present needs—the present moment’s needs. That is because the sustenance of his immediately upcoming moment is with God. Monotheism requires him to be more assured of that which is with God than of that which he would keep in store. Uttering the attestation “there is no deity but God” in effect requires man to pass all his concerns and his livelihood to God. Hence, the high-meaning of superfluous, to the Prophet, is whatever exceeds his present moment’s needs. To ordinary practitioners, superfluous is the customary dues existing in the alm’s tax. We carry on this conversation to show that the Quran, especially in the literal meanings of the Arabic words and text, lowers to these illusions—the sensory illusions that we furnished evidence for, as well as the mental illusions with regard to the question of conscious will.

We cited verses as evidence that the apparent meanings follow the sensory illusion given by eyesight: that the Earth is flat. Verses that we mentioned included, “the Earth We have spread out” (51:48), and “Who has made for you the Earth as a cradle” (20:53). We also cited as evidence verses following mental illusions, the illusory will we claim for ourselves; we believe that we have an independent will under our control. The verses we cited: “Whoever wills among you may take a right course. Your will is effectual only if it is the Will of God, the Lord of the worlds” (81:28-29). Furthermore, there are the very same illusions of custom represented in the matter of wealth, whereas the Quran states that the wealth belongs to the people. We cited this verse as an evidence of following these illusions: “Take from their wealth alms, you would cleanse them and purify them thereby, and pray for them; your prayer is a relief to them” (9:103). Although in another place it says: “Give them of the wealth of God which He has given you” (24:33). In this course of following illusion, we also cited evidence related to an issue with a very significant impact on people’s behavior. It is the issue of people believing that God commanded us not to spend without restraint. That is to say, He commanded us to spend some of our wealth. Yes, He commanded us to spend some of our wealth, yet this command is following our illusion. It is following the illusion represented in our belief that if we spent in such a way we would face poverty. Since our inner-selves are avaricious, He gradually urges us according to our capability. The verse we cited as evidence for that was: “Do not let your hand be fettered to your neck nor extend it fully, for then you will sit down rebuked, regretful” (17:29). These words are not directed to the Prophet because, as we said, the Prophet used to spend without restraint. Yet, if we had been asked to spend as the Prophet—if that had been our code, we would have despaired. We would have been in distress and hardship, and it would have been difficult for us to ascend the heights of religion. Actually, it would have been difficult to embrace religion in the first place. That is because the Quran says, “Inner-selves are swayed by avarice” (4:128), and “Whoever is saved from his own avarice, such are they who are successful” (59:9). So, the matter of obligation requires transitional phasing.

What is clear in this entire topic that we have discussed is that without collaborating with monotheism, the literal meanings of the text only mislead. In fact, they can veil the true meanings, and therefore can have a hindering and detrimental effect on monotheism. We carry on in this discussion that we started earlier, to substantiate that the apparent meanings of the Quran do not represent the true meanings of the Quran. Stating the fact that the Arabic language is incapable of conveying the true meanings of the Quran should not take such a long time, yet the focus on language is what people are accustomed to. Even some people express disapproval of our opinion that the Quran cannot be understood through Arabic language alone. However, meanings of the Quran are in fact wound up in the Divine Self. That is to say, the Quran is God Self. That is because the Quran is the word of God, whereas God does not speak in Arabic except when descending so that we can understand Him. In His Self, however, God’s speech is a quality of His Self. To say that the Quran is the word of God means that finitely it is God Self. This finiteness leads the Arabic words to carry their utmost meanings which wind up as signs as in the verse: “Alif Lam Mim. That Scripture, there is no doubt is a guidance for the pious” (2:1-2). Here, the pronoun “that” refers to the signs “Alif Lam Mim,” which we have discussed in our previous episodes.

When signs are the utmost of the spoken word it as if the sign is telling us: your aim is ahead. With the Arabic language, we can understand information received through minds. After all, the prerequisite for disciplined minds to exist is expressive language. As a matter of fact, expressive language is actually a production of our minds. It is the means by which the mind gives expression, and it has been devised for daily living and from the needs of daily living. Expressive language originated from the sounds we share with living beings and objects—from sounds produced by animals, as previously explained. So, the highest degree of articulate sophistication is no more than the highest degree of mental sophistication, and the mind has absolutely no ability to comprehend the Divine Self. It has absolutely no ability to fully comprehend the Divine Self. Rational proofs are indicators that the Divine Self exists, yet it is fully described by the attributes that are above the mind’s perception. As a matter of fact, the same goes for transmitted texts. Reasoning always develops from transmitted texts. However a transmitted text leads to the point where words fall short. That is to say, God Self cannot be described, identified, or named. It is ineffable. An example of the transmitted text that deems God far above description is: “Glorified be your Mighty Lord from that which they describe; peace be upon the Messengers; praise to God, the Lord of the Worlds” (37:180-182). The following with “peace be upon the Messengers” is because the Messengers are the greatest who described God—the Messengers are the most knowing who have described God.

Furthermore, the Messengers only described God with what He attributed unto His Self. The Messengers’ descriptions of Him, as with the ninety nine best attributes of God reported in the Quran, are not attributed by the Prophet unto God; rather they are the descriptions attributed by God unto His Self revealed to the Prophet. So, the meaning of “peace be upon the Messengers” is that they came with the most perfect description of Him. It is rightly said of His own Self-description that He is also bound by an ordinary perception. It is as if He is attributing unto His Self descriptions that we share with Him. For example, the seven Divine attributes revealed to us in the Quran (Alive, Knower, Willer, Abler, Hearer, Sighted, and Speaker) are God’s attributes and ours as well. We share attributes with Him. We are entitled to all of the ninety nine best attributes of God. Actually, they are primarily ours, while God’s entitlement to them is by conveyance because He is far above and too great for them. Yet, we can only know Him through what we know of our own attributes. We as living beings, when God speaks of ‘Alive,’ it comes to our minds as the concept of life; we as knowing beings, when He speaks of ‘Knower,’ it comes to our minds as the concept of knowledge; we as willing beings, when He speaks of ‘Willer,’ it comes to our minds as the concept of willingness; and thus the rest of the attributes. Hence, we would have not known Him if we were not similar to Him. For this reason, our attributes are similar to one another. His attributes and ours are similar—we are similar to Him.