Session Thirty-Three, The Proofs of Inherent Human Dignity
Session Thirty-Three
The Proofs of Inherent Human Dignity — The First Proof: The Qur’anic Verses — The Fifteenth Through the Twentieth Verse
April 12, 2025
Summary of the Previous Session
We have indicated most of the verses cited as evidence in our previous discussions; a few further verses remain. In total, fourteen verses have been cited thus far, from which, broadly speaking, we may derive inherent human dignity in the sense already indicated. The fourteenth verse concerned innate disposition (fiṭrah); we explained how the verse, “the fiṭrah of God upon which He has created [all] people; no change should there be in the creation of God” (فِطْرَتَ اللَّهِ الَّتِي فَطَرَ النَّاسَ عَلَيْهَا لَا تَبْدِيلَ لِخَلْقِ اللَّهِ), indicates inherent human dignity, and how all human beings—whether Muslim or unbeliever, just or unjust—partake of this distinction and advantage.
Certain further verses, some five categories of them, likewise indicate, in a certain manner, the matter of innate disposition (whether in the sphere of cognition or in the sphere of inclination); we shall not cite these verses separately here, since their indication pertains, in fact, to the innate character of certain matters, and so, having already set forth the principal verse on innate disposition, these verses are accordingly subsumed beneath it. The verses of the covenant (mīthāq), the verses of remembrance (tadhakkur), the verses of forgetfulness (nisyān), the verses concerning turning to God in moments of danger, and the verses concerning the belovedness of faith—these were the five categories we had indicated as pointing to the reality of innate disposition; and innate disposition, certainly, is itself a form of dignity from God, admitting of no substitution—all partake of it, and no change finds its way into it.
The Fifteenth Verse
A further set of verses indicates the creation of the heavens and the earth for the human being: “[He] who made for you the earth a bed [spread out] and the sky a ceiling and sent down rain from the sky and brought forth thereby fruits as provision for you” (الَّذِي جَعَلَ لَكُمُ الْأَرْضَ فِرَاشًا وَالسَّمَاءَ بِنَاءً وَأَنْزَلَ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مَاءً فَأَخْرَجَ بِهِ مِنَ الثَّمَرَاتِ رِزْقًا لَكُمْ). This verse sets forth the creation of the heavens and the earth, the manner in which the two correspond to one another, and the fact that God sent down rain so that human beings might benefit from the earth and make use of its fruits as provision. The very reference to the creation of the heavens and the earth, and to their fruits as provision for the human being, constitutes a favor particular to the human being. When we say it is a favor particular to the human being, we mean that the human being is the primary object intended by the creation of the heavens and the earth; although other beings, too, within the order of creation, possess provision and benefit from it—animals and plants, too, partake of this world—they are, however, intended in a secondary and incidental sense, whereas the human being constitutes the principal foundation. That the creation of this world, the heavens, and the earth, is for the human being, constitutes, without doubt, a particular favor and an indication of the human being’s honoring by God; nowhere, moreover, is it stated that We created these things, for instance, for the believers alone or for Muslims alone. It does not say, “He who made for the believers the earth a bed” (الَّذِي جَعَلَ لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ الْأَرْضَ فِرَاشًا), nor “and brought forth thereby fruits as provision for Muslims” (فَأَخْرَجَ بِهِ مِنَ الثَّمَرَاتِ رِزْقًا لِلْمُسْلِمِينَ); rather, this address is directed toward all human beings.
The Sixteenth Verse
“Have you not seen that God has made subject to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth and amply bestowed upon you His favors, outward and unseen?” (أَلَمْ تَرَوْا أَنَّ اللَّهَ سَخَّرَ لَكُمْ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَأَسْبَغَ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعَمَهُ ظَاهِرَةً وَبَاطِنَةً). This, too, is close in substance to the previous verse, except that it makes explicit that God Almighty has subjected to the human being whatever is in the heavens and the earth, along with His outward and unseen favors. As to whether the subjection of this world to the human being reverts to that same faculty of rational thought and reflection, or whether it constitutes, in itself, an independent distinction, this particular question is not of great importance. What matters is that this power of mastery over the world is universal in scope and is not confined to any particular segment of humanity; rather, it is an honoring on the part of God, one that endures until the Day of Resurrection and is never divested.
The Seventeenth Verse
“And He has made subject to you the sun and the moon, continuous [in their courses], and has made subject to you the night and the day” (وَسَخَّرَ لَكُمُ الشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ دَائِبَيْنِ وَسَخَّرَ لَكُمُ اللَّيْلَ وَالنَّهَارَ); here, in particular, two material realities—night and day, which arise from the movement of the sun and the moon—are mentioned. It states: God has made the night and the day subject to you; He has made the sun and the moon subject to you. By the same line of reasoning already indicated, this too points to inherent human dignity. Truly, if we do not derive the honoring and dignifying of the human being from these verses, what other meaning could they possibly bear?
The Eighteenth Verse
“And it is He who subjected the sea for you to eat from it tender meat and to extract from it ornaments which you wear” (وَهُوَ الَّذِي سَخَّرَ الْبَحْرَ لِتَأْكُلُوا مِنْهُ لَحْمًا طَرِيًّا وَتَسْتَخْرِجُوا مِنْهُ حِلْيَةً تَلْبَسُونَهَا).
The Nineteenth Verse
“And He has subjected for you the ships that they may sail through the sea by His command, and He has subjected for you the rivers” (وَسَخَّرَ لَكُمُ الْفُلْكَ لِتَجْرِيَ فِي الْبَحْرِ بِأَمْرِهِ وَسَخَّرَ لَكُمُ الْأَنْهَارَ).
In these last few verses, reference is made either, in general, to the subjugation of this world and the human being’s power of mastery over it, or to the human being’s power of mastery over certain particular favors. This naturally raises the question of what is meant by “[He has] subjected for you” (sakhkhara lakum). In verses such as “and it is He who subjected the sea” (وَهُوَ الَّذِي سَخَّرَ الْبَحْرَ) or “has God made subject to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth” (أَلَمْ تَرَوْا أَنَّ اللَّهَ سَخَّرَ لَكُمْ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ)—what, precisely, does “subjected for you” mean here? We have already indicated that two meanings may be cited in this regard:
One meaning is that subjugation (taskhīr) means the rendering of something submissive toward a particular end—a forced subduing, a forced submission. According to this meaning, the world has been tamed for the human being and placed under his command; God has created the world in such a way that it falls under the command of the human being.
The other meaning is that God Almighty has created this world in such a manner that the human being is perpetually engaged in deriving benefit and advantage from it—that is, this world perpetually confers benefit and advantage upon human beings.
Evidence has been cited for each of these two meanings; yet perhaps most exegetes concur with the first meaning and have set it forth accordingly. As already indicated, God Almighty has created this world in such a way that it falls under the human being’s command and mastery; this is among the greatest of honorings and dignifyings accorded to the human being. Were it not for the human being qua human being, all these favors and this subjugation of the world by God’s command would have no meaning whatsoever for him.
The Twentieth Verse
A further category of verses indicates, in a certain manner, the existence of human and moral emotions within the human being. We have already explained what human and moral emotions consist of; what chiefly matters is that, within the sphere of these emotions—whether viewed from an internal or an external standpoint—no difference whatsoever exists among human beings with respect to color, race, belief, or religion. It is this human emotion which, when a person assists another human being in a moment of dire need, produces within him an inner sense of satisfaction; and should he forgo this act, censure and reproach overtake him. This is the inward state. From the external standpoint, too, this very censure and reproach is administered by others; that is, when others observe a human being displaying human emotion and showing care and beneficence toward another, they hold him in esteem and praise him; but when they observe someone avoiding this, they condemn him. Both within the human being himself, and among rational people generally, praise and blame are thus rendered with respect to conduct grounded in moral and human emotions.
I have offered this introduction because we may perhaps regard verses 1 and 2 of Sūrat al-Qiyāmah as indicating this very meaning: “I swear by the Day of Resurrection, and I swear by the reproaching soul” (لَا أُقْسِمُ بِيَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ * وَلَا أُقْسِمُ بِالنَّفْسِ اللَّوَّامَةِ). This, admittedly, requires certain implicit premises in order to sustain the claim. The “reproaching soul” (al-nafs al-lawwāmah) is precisely that soul which reproaches; it is not improbable that the reproaching soul reverts to that very same innate disposition or conscience (wijdān) of the human being. Conscience differs from innate disposition; two meanings have been cited for conscience; we have noted that, according to one view, innate disposition and conscience are one and the same, while, according to another view, they differ. Setting aside whether innate disposition and conscience are identical or not, and setting aside whether the reproaching soul reverts to innate disposition and conscience or not, it is certain that the human being possesses a certain power, and that a certain inner matter exists within him that reproaches both himself and others. What, then, does this reproaching soul, this soul of censure, reproach the human being for? The reproaching soul stands opposite the soul that commands [to evil] (al-nafs al-ammārah); the soul that commands [to evil] commands toward wickedness … whereas the reproaching soul is that soul which impels the human being toward good and toward virtuous deeds. Should a person, God forbid, fall into polytheism, or display ingratitude toward God as the Absolute Benefactor, the reproaching soul reproaches him for it. Likewise, should he fail to display human emotion toward another, it reproaches him for this as well; nor is this necessarily confined to the withholding of beneficence toward others—this reproaching soul reproaches him in advance for any failure to show beneficence, and issues a warning with respect to the future. This verse, then, in a certain manner, indicates the human being’s enjoyment of a particular favor and distinction termed “the reproaching soul.” The reproaching soul, too, belongs to all human beings, and is not confined to the pious and the faithful. It is true, of course, that some suppress the reproaching soul to such a degree that its reproach can no longer be heard; it possesses, in such cases, no power whatsoever to raise its voice or to be heard; and even where it retains some voice, that voice is a feeble one.
I have, by now, set out the manner of argumentation for nearly all of these verses, showing how each indicates the claim in question. The same criterion I set forth in the previous session applies here as well: if a particular favor has been granted specifically to the human being and has not been granted to others—even if some important purpose and aim lay behind it—the very granting of a particular favor and distinction to the human being is, in the end, indicative of inherent dignity. Inherent dignity means precisely this: that the human being enjoys a particular gift that others do not possess.
Question:
Response: I have said that some of these verses indicate the claim explicitly, namely those verses in which the term “honoring” (takrīm), “beneficence” (iḥsān), or “most excellent” (aḥsan) is employed—”And We have certainly honored the children of Adam” (وَلَقَدْ كَرَّمْنَا بَنِي آدَمَ), “We have certainly created man in the best of stature” (وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنْسَانَ فِي أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِيمٍ); we have already explained the meanings of these. Perhaps fewer verses employ precisely these terms and expressions; yet most of the verses indicate the underlying reality of this honoring and beneficence, even where the term “honoring” or “beneficence” is not itself employed within them. The twenty verses we have read are, for the most part, of this very character; in all of them, God Almighty has referred to a particular favor and a special gift bestowed upon the human being. I have repeatedly noted that, when God states that We gave this to the human being alone and to no other, this is stated in a context of bestowing favor (imtinān), alongside which an element of reproach (ʿitāb) is likewise present. This constitutes a favor that God has bestowed upon the human being. This very bestowal of favor is, in reality, nothing other than the honoring of the human being, the according of greatness to the human being, the dignifying of the human being; for what else, indeed, could dignity and the bestowal of a particular favor upon the human being mean, if not that it renders him possessed of dignity? … “that We may test you [as to] which of you is best in deed” (لِيَبْلُوَكُمْ أَيُّكُمْ أَحْسَنُ عَمَلًا) … In those verses where mention was made of testing and trial, the matter of “best in deed” was subsequently raised; and it was upon this notion of “best in deed,” which becomes evident in consequence of the trial, that we relied in drawing our conclusion—the trial itself, as such, was not what concerned us. It is as though you harbor some apprehension at our stating that the human being possesses inherent dignity … Let me press you for an acknowledgment on this point: our claim is that the human being possesses inherent dignity; what, indeed, does inherent dignity mean? Dignity means that the human being has been accorded greatness, has been honored, and has been held in respect; for these gifts and favors have been granted to him, in particular, among all the beings of this world, and this on account of his being human—it is because he is human that these things have been given to him. The basic fact of God’s bestowal of these favors specifically upon the human being cannot be denied. These favors have been given to the human being qua human being, and none of them has been contingent upon Islam, faith, or justice. He says, We gave these things to the human being; and His saying “We gave” does not mean this was without purpose—He certainly had a purpose in view. That purpose was that the human being should attain the summit, and there is no doubt of this; yet the basic fact of the human being’s actual honoring, and the bestowal of particular favors and distinctions upon the human being, independent of any distinguishing factor that separates human beings from one another, constitutes inherent dignity. Inherent dignity means precisely that by which the human being has been honored on account of being human; we have already set forth the foundations for this. All of these verses indicate this very matter; true, each does so in its own particular manner … If, then, we say that these constitute proofs of inherent human dignity (inherent, too, possessing those very characteristics we have already indicated), this means that the human being has been granted favors, gifts, and distinctions that are unchangeable, universal, and non-divestible. … Is this not an according of greatness and an honoring? … You accept the basic principle of dignity under this description; let us now turn to the second stage, and ask whether the human being’s enjoyment of such favors, distinctions, benefits, and advantages gives rise to the establishment of certain rights for him, or not. We have already stated, in our discussion of the foundations, within the second stage, that it certainly does; when God states that We created the human being such that he is either grateful or ungrateful, that We showed him the way, that We created the human being such that no compulsion or coercion exists with respect to him in the matter of faith—what does this mean? It means that We gave him the right of choice and the right of free will, and that you, accordingly, cannot take from him this right of choice and free will … I say that the most certain core of natural rights—the right to life, the right to freedom in choice and free will—[is established by this] … As for those who say that the non-human, that the unbeliever, is not human—can such a statement even be made?