Man and Universe [Electronic resources] نسخه متنی

In this verse in the course of a moral teaching the social philosophy
of the creation of man has been enunciated. The verse says that man has
been created in such a way that various nations and tribes have been formed.
People are identified by means of a reference to the nations and the tribes
to which they belong. Thus the verse resolves a social problem, for it
is an essential condition --of social life that people should be able
to know and distinguish each other. Had there been no national, tribal'
and similar other affinities, which are a uniting as well as a distinguishing
feature, identification of people would have been impossible and consequently
there would have been no possibility of the existence of a social life
based on the mutual relations of men. National and tribal affiliations
and such other distinctions as those of shape, colour and size fix the
identity of each individual. Had all individuals been of the same shape,
the same colour and the same features and there had existed no difference
of affiliations among them, all individuals would have been identical
like the machine-made goods produced by a factory and would have been
indistinguishable from one another. Consequently their identification
would have been impossible and as a final result no social life could
be established on the basis of mutual relations and the exchange of ideas,
goods and services. Therefore man's affiliation to different tribes and
communities has a goal and a purpose. This kind of distinction is an essential
condition of social life. Anyhow, affiliation to a particular race or
family is not a matter of pride or the basis of claiming any superiority.
In fact the basis of superiority is nothing but human nobility and individuals
piety. The Holy Qur'an says: "And He it is Who has created
man from water and has appointed for him kindred by blood and kindred
by marriage." (Surah
al-Furqan, 25:54)

This verse describes the blood and marriage relationships which bind the individuals to one another and form the basis of their identification, as a creational scheme designed for a sound and wise purpose. At another place the Holy Qur'an says:

"Is it they who apportion the mercy of your Lord? We have
apportioned among them their livelihood in the life of the world and raised
some of them above others in rank so that some of them may take labour
from others; and the mercy of your Lord is better than what they amass."
(Surah
az-Zukhruf , 43:32)

In the course of our discussion on monotheism (Monotheistic conception
of the world) we have already explained the meaning of this verse. Briefly
it may be said that the verse indicates that men have not been created
alike in regard to their potentialities and talents. Had they been created
alike, everybody would have had what the others had and would have lacked
what the others lacked. In, that case naturally there would have been
no question of reciprocal need of each other and reciprocal service to
each other Allah has created men dissimilar to each other in regard to
their talents an their physical, spiritual, intellectual and emotional
potentialities. He has made some of them superior to some others in certain
respects, while those others are often superior to these in some other
respects. In this way all depend on each other and are naturally desirous
to join hands with each other. Thus Allah has paved the way for social
life of men. The above verse shows that social life is something natural.
It has neither been forced upon man, nor has it been adopted by him of
his own choice.

The Holy Qur'an says: "Every nation shall be summoned to its
record." (Surah
al-Jathiyah, 45:28)

This shows that each nation has a record of its deeds, and as a living,
conscious and responsible being, shall be summoned to render an account
of what it did.

The Holy Qur'an says: "To every nation We have made their
deeds seem fair." (Surah
al-An'am, 6: 109)

This verse indicates that every nation acquires a special outlook, a special way of thinking and some special standards. Each nation has a special way of looking at things and understanding them. The judgements of each nation are based on the special standards adopted by it. Each nation has its own taste. The acts which seem fair to one nation, appear to be unfair to another. It is the social atmosphere of a nation which determines the taste of its individual members. The Holy Quran says:

"Every nation tried to seize their Prophet and argued falsely
with a view to refute the truth. Then I seized them, and how awful was
My punishment." (Surah
al-Mu'min, 40:5)

This verse refers to a shameful collective decision with a view to fight the truth. In it, there is also a mention of a general punishment for this collective offence.

In the Holy Qur'an there are instances in which the act of one individual
in society has been attributed to the whole society or the act of one
generation has been attributed to the subsequent generations.[16]
This is possible only in the cases in which a particular people may be
of one collective way of thinking and may be having, so to say, one collective
spirit. For example, in the story of the tribe of Thamud, the action of
one man who hamstrung the she-camel of Prophet Salih, has been attributed
to the whole tribe. The Qur'an says: "They hamstrung her".
Thus the whole tribe has been regarded as culpable and deserving punishment.
"So your Lord destroyed them".

Explaining this point in one of his sermons Imam Ali says: "Men! The only thing which unites people and provides them with a common destiny is happiness and resentment".

When people collectively feel pleased or displeased with something which
might have been done by one single person, they are to be regarded as
one man and they have a common destiny. The she-camel of Thamud was hamstrung
by one individual, but Allah punished the whole tribe, because they all
were pleased with his action. Allah has said: "They hamstrung
her and so they had to regret." (Surah
ash-Shu'ara', 26:167)

Allah punished them all because they all approved the decision taken by that one man. Hence, when that decision was put into practice it was actually the collective decision of them all. Though hamstringing was the action of one man, Allah has ascribed it to them generally. He said that they hamstrung the she-camel, and not that one of them hamstrung her.

Here there is another point worth-remembering. To be merely pleased with
a sin without practically committing it, is not regarded as a sin. If
a person feels happy on knowing that some other person has committed or
is about to commit a sin, that person himself will not regarded as guilty.
Even if a person decides to commit a sin himself, but does not commit
it actually, he is not to blame.

The approval of a sin committed by another individual is considered to be a sin only when this approval amounts to some sort of participation in the decision about that sin or in the commitment of it. That is the nature of all collective sins. First the social atmosphere and the collective spirit of people approve the commitment of a particular sin and pave the way for it. Then one member of society whose decision is a part of the decision of other members and whose approval is a part of the approval of others, perpetrates that sin actually. In this case the sin of that individual is the sin of all members of that society. What has been stated by Imam Ali visualizes this kind of situation and inter alia explains the meaning of the above quoted verse. Otherwise mere happiness or resentment not involving participation in the decision and the action of the actual perpetrator is not regarded as a sin.

In the Holy Quran occasionally the deeds of one generation also have been attributed to the subsequent generations. For example the past deeds of the Israelites have been attributed to the Jews contemporary to the Holy Prophet. The Holy Qur'an says that these people deserve humiliation and ignominy because they used to kill the Prophets. That was said because from the viewpoint of the Holy Qur'an the Israelites of the time of the Holy Prophet were a continuation and an extension of their predecessors who used to kill the Prophets. Not only that, but from the point of view of collective thinking they were exactly those people of the past who still continued to exist. The French philosopher, Auguste Comte says: "Human society consists more of the dead than of the living". In other words, in all periods of history the people of the past influence mankind more than the living people. The statement that "the dead more than ever continue to rule over the living", means the same thing. (Vide: Raymond Aron's Main Currents in Sociological Thought, Vol. I, p. 91)

Al-Mizan, the celebrated commentary on the Holy Qur'an, discussing the question that a society having one spirit and one collective thinking assumes the position of just one human being and all its members become as if they are the organs of one person, says that all the members of society become so absorbed into the personality of society that their joys and griefs become the joys and griefs of society and their prosperity and misery become its prosperity and misery. Al-Mizan continues to say: "The Holy Qur'an has expressed this view regarding the nations and societies having a collective thinking as a result of their religious or national bias, by declaring the subsequent generations accountable for the deeds of the preceding generations. The Holy Qur'an blames the present people for the deeds of their fore-fathers. Obviously this is the only correct way of passing judgement on the people having a collective thinking and a collective spirit". (al-Mizan, vol. IV, p. 112)

The sentence: "If you repeat (the crime), We shall also repeat the punishment", has been addressed to a community and not to any individual. Hence it clearly shows that the laws governing societies are universal.