Monday, 11 May 2026 (24 Dhuʻl-Qiʻdah 1447 AH)
Question: Some of the scholars of Baghdad – namely Abū al-Qāsim al-Balḫī and those who agreed with him – and some of the Imāmiyyah, and some jurists of the four (schools), said: “An act is only evil by virtue of itself,” that is, by its very essence and kind. They said: because the original ruling regarding unrestricted acts is prohibition. Imām Yaḥyā ibn Ḥamzah (Peace be upon him) interpreted their words, saying:
“Their statement does not escape three possible meanings:
1. Either they intend by that that the ugliness of an ugly act does not change according to the state of the doer – contrary to what these Ashʿarīs say – and this we do not deny.
2. Or what they mean is that the ugliness of what is ugly is due to a matter particular to it and to an aspect under which it occurs, without the factor producing that ugliness being something external to its essence, such as the agent or a cause – and this is good; we do not deny it.
3. Or what they mean is that ugliness is ascribed to the ugly thing – that is, to the very essence of the act – and this is invalid; for two things that are alike may be such that one of them is ugly and the other beautiful. And it is of the nature of what is firmly attached to an essence that things which are alike do not differ regarding it. Two different things may share in these rulings, so it would follow that they must be identical; thus, ascribing these rulings to the essence is invalid.” End quote.
The question: What is the meaning of the statement of some of the scholars of Baghdad and those who agreed with them, with an example? And what is the meaning of the three possible interpretations mentioned by Imām Yaḥyā (Peace be upon him), with examples?
Answer – and Allah is the One who grants success: The meaning of the words of the scholars of Baghdad and those who agreed with them, which you have transmitted from them, is that an act becomes evil without (any) cause or reason. It suffices, in their view, that the name “act” is truly applicable to it; whatever this name applies to is, according to them, ugly (evil). That is because, in their view, the default ruling for acts is prohibition.
As for the interpretations of Imām Yaḥyā ibn Ḥamzah (Peace be upon him):
1. Either they intend by their words what we ourselves say, namely that the ugliness of something ugly does not change with the identity of the doer. Take injustice (ẓulm), for example: we say that injustice is ugly whether it is done by slaves or whether it is done by the Lord of all the worlds – and this is contrary to the doctrine of the Ashʿarīs, for they say that the ugly thing changes into something good if it is done by the Lord of all the worlds. So if this is what they meant, then there is no disagreement between us and them.
2. Or they intend that injustice, for example, is ugly because it occurs under a particular aspect, and that aspect is its being devoid of bringing about any benefit or repelling any harm or (fulfilling any) desert. When an act occurs in this condition, it is ugly. And his saying, “from other than the factor being something external…” – that is, the effect of the agent on the ugliness is something external, just as the Ashʿarīs say: that an act is ugly because its doer is a servant. And the effect of the cause (ʿillah) is like what the Ashʿarīs also say: that an act is ugly on account of the prohibition, for prohibition, according to them, is the cause of the ugliness of what is ugly.
3. The last interpretation: If what they intend is that an act is ugly because it is an act – that beating is ugly because it is beating, killing is ugly because it is killing, and so on, so that they ascribe the ugliness of killing to its being killing – then this is not valid and we do not agree with them on it. That is because this would entail that killing in retribution (qiṣāṣ) and killing in aggression are equal in ugliness, and likewise that striking the orphan for discipline and striking him in aggression are equal in ugliness – and that is clearly false. So reflect.
Source: Min Thimār al-ʿIlm wa al-Ḥikmah vol.3