Three People Who Die

Numerous reasons are given for the change that then took place in the ideology of Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī, and in his life, in the midst of all of this. One account relates that once, on an issue of Islamic theology, he put a question to his teacher, Abū ʿAlī al-Jubbāʾī: “What do you say about three people who die? One died as an adult and a sinner. One died as an adult, but as a pious person. And the third died as a child. What do you say about these three individuals, in terms of how Allah (swt) will deal with them — Paradise and Hell?”

This was all in relation to the opinion of the Muʿtazilah that Allah (swt) has to do what is in the best interest of people. That needs to be kept in mind, because this is what the whole exchange is about: the claim that Allah is forced to do what is in the best interest of each individual.

So Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī asked this question. Abū ʿAlī al-Jubbāʾī said: the sinner, Allah will send to Hell. The pious person will go to Paradise. It was very simple for the Muʿtazilah to put people here and there. The young one will go neither to Paradise nor to Hell. Very simple.

He first asked him about the young child. What happens if the young child says to Allah (swt): “Why did You not allow me to grow up and be good, so that I could be in Paradise? Why did You leave me in this kind of intermediate position?” Abū ʿAlī al-Jubbāʾī answered that no, what Allah will say is: “I knew you were going to be a sinner had you grown up, so I gave you death at an early age.” So far, according to their ideology, all was fine.

Then Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī asked: what then of the sinner who died as an adult and was sent to Hell? What happens if he says to Allah: “Why did You not give me death at an early age as well, so that at least I could have been saved from the torment of Hell?” That is where Abū ʿAlī al-Jubbāʾī was not able to respond. All of this, it should be remembered, is in view of their ideology that Allah has to do what is in the best interest of the individual.

Some say that this was the turning point in his life. Others have related other things: that one day he disappeared. He did not come out for about 13, or 15, or 18 days; a number of days, several days. When he did come out, he went into the main masjid, onto the minbar, and declared there that he renounced what he used to believe in, just as he was taking off his garment that day. He took off his garment, the overgarment that he had on. Just as he took this off, he said, so he shed himself of the ideas he had held before; and what he now believed in was contained in these books. He had some written material with him, which he gave out.

Allah knows best, but he was the saviour for the Islamic faith at the time. Shaykh Abū al-Ḥasan al-Nadwī has in fact included him in the Saviours of Islamic Spirit series as well. Up to that point, the other ʿulamāʾ were not necessarily very versed in epistemology and the various disciplines that had been inherited from the Greeks. He was very well versed in them, and he was able to respond using that same methodology; he was, after all, the greatest of them at the time. So he was able to turn around and simply break their ideas. This happened in Baghdad, in Iraq.