Q32:13

wa‑law shiʾnā laātaynā kulla nafsin hudahā wa‑lākin ḥaqqa l‑qawlu minnī [ wa‑lākin ḥaqqa l‑qawlu minnī ] la‑amlaʾanna jahannama mina l‑jinnati wa‑l‑nāsi ajmaʿīna

Clearity

The beginning and the end of verse 32:13 are crystal clear: God could have given everybody sufficient guidance to understand that he exists, and will send people to Hell.

The middle part of the verse kind-of sort-of gives a reason why he chose not to guide us, but it’s more like: this is how things are—without giving an exact explanation why things had to be that way. So, lets see what commentators say to make it clearer.

Commentators and discussion

Muhammad Asad says this: “We could indeed have given unto every being (nafs) his guidance, i.e., forcibly: but since this would have deprived man of his ability to choose between right and wrong - and, thus, of all moral responsibility - God does not “impose” His guidance upon anyone (cf. 26:4 and the corresponding note)”.

The reference to Q26:4: “Had We so willed, We could have sent down unto them a message from the skies, so that their necks would [be forced to] bown down before it in humility” and the attached comment is: “Inasmuch as the spiritual value of man’s faith depends on its being an outcome of free choice and not of compulsion, the visible or audible appearance of a “message from the skies” would, by its very obviousness, nullify the element of free choice and, therefore deprive man’s faith in that message of all its moral significance.”

Lets look at the context of verse 26:4, in the translation of Khattab:

It is really interesting that Khattab felt compelled to insert “compelling” (just as Asad inserted “be forced to”).

There are translations that don’t have such an insertion. For example: “But if We had so willed, We could have sent down to them a sign from the heavens so that their heads would be bowed down before it in utter humility.”.

The reason for the translators to add these words is theological I think. They want to emphasize the inevitability of becoming a believer as soon as there is a (really) clear sign of God. Instead, we have to make do with the words that Mohammad has preached that have been collected in the Qur'an and other Islamic scripture.

Lets look at another commentator, Yusuf Ali:

So, commentators want us to believe that God cannot give really clear signs, because that would mean we would surely believe, and rob us of “free will”. On the other hand, if God gives signs that are less “compelling”, we supposedly have the “free will” to be good, choose the right thing and believe, or be wicked and not believe, without any compulsion.

This is of course entirely false. Weirdly, God seems to agree, because “Whatever new reminder comes to them from the Most Compassionate, they always turn away from it.” There are people who will be unconvinced by the words that Mohammad has preached, and there’s nothing to be done about that. According to God those people are wicked, end of story. There’s no “free will” there.

With regard to how it impacts “free will”, there’s ultimately no difference between “compelling” signs from the sky and more subtle signs like “look at the earth, ˹to see˺ how many types of fine plants We have caused to grow in it?”, or other words of scripture. The reason for that is that we cannot choose to believe or not believe something. Either you’re convinced, or you’re not.

If for some people the text of the Qur'an is unconvincing, the proper thing to do is to give them signs that are more credible, but God rather sends those people to Hell.

How can anybody be “free” to understand or not understand? To some people the mere existence of “fine plants We have caused to grow” is sufficient reason to understand that “surely there must be a God”. Other people will have other explanations, perhaps because they were raised in another religion, of perhaps because of something they learned in school, or perhaps they simply admit that they don’t know “why something exists rather than nothing”.

Some people will say: “surely the Qur'an is the word of God”. Again, people from other religions will dispute that, secular people might say: “it’s just an old book”. Seemingly, according to God this “lack of comprehension” is wickedness that needs to be punished with Hell, but at the same time he refuses to give a clear “sign from the sky” because that would make people understand that he not is a fictional character from a man-made book after all.

Of course for believers there are ways around the problem that I see here. Lets try a few.

1. Accept that there is no free will, life is simply a way of sifting good and bad people.
2. Persist that there is free will, but argue that (more or less blind) faith is a way to sift good and bad people.

In the case of Islam, (1) is difficult to accept. Most interpreters of the Qur'an tell us that God wants us to have “free will” and that as result of that inevitably some people will “freely” choose to follow their wicked impulses. But where did those people get those wicked impulses? They could not have chosen their attributes before birth can they? Only God can do that.

If simply acting out one’s God given impulses constitutes “free will” then why did God not choose to give all people the attributes that allows people to “freely” choose to do good? Don’t tell me that we cannot know God’s reasons here. If he can (the God of Islam is omnipotent so yeah, he can) he should not do evil.

Argument (2) goes against the idea that God gave us a brain to think. A smart person will not rush to a conclusion on the basis of insufficient evidence. But God rewards people that are gullible and do? That is just weird.

If you find any of the above compelling or not, do you freely choose to accept it or reject it?

Bibliography

See social.ningen.one/scripture/Bibliography.