When a traveler gets lost, they quickly take refuge in their map and carefully consider their location, destination, and paths. If they encounter an ethical dilemma, they turn inward, carefully weighing their options, deciding whether to move forward or hold back. If they are incapable of something, their mind will be occupied with construction or refutation, analysis or synthesis, deduction or extrapolation. If they seek communication, they light the torches of their language, transferring their intellectual and emotional treasures to the other side. Driven by various factors, humans can unfortunately lose their way, their moral compass, their capacity for reason, or their power of communication through language. These essential tools can become dulled and ineffective, leaving us a far cry from who we once were. Modern humans are like a decrepit turtle, lying on its back and barely regaining its normal position! Perhaps “faithful philosophy” is able to guide a person to their correct settings through the magic code: “fitra.” This text reflects a summary of the most important features of the philosopher of fitra: Ibn Taymiyyah, with condensed and sequential paragraphs.
Perhaps a key mark of a profound philosopher is the ability to capture their essence in just a word or two, even if they have written thousands of pages across hundreds of books. In doing so, they have succeeded in synthesizing the disparate strands of their thought into a core principle or idea. This “encapsulated” description is never an easy feat to the readers of any philosopher. It has multiple requirements. First, the application of rigorous methodological tools. Second, in-depth immersion in the philosopher’s corpus. Third, marshaling strong evidence to justify the proposed distillation. When such a concise characterization is proposed, the specialized academic community carefully scrutinizes it, debating the merits of the interpretation and rendering an explicit or implicit verdict of acceptance or rejection – the proportions of which can vary from case to case.
After a series of careful readings in the Ibn Taymiyyah heritage (died in 1328), especially the heritage closely related to philosophical literature, most notably his two books: Dar Ta’arud al-Aql wa-l-Naql (Refutation of the contradiction of reason and revelation) and Al-Radd ala al-Mantiqiyyin (Rebuttal of the Logicians), I concluded that the most accurate description can be given to this big philosopher that he is a “fitra philosopher.” I know that some people in specialized literature have given such a title to some Muslim philosophers, including Ibn a Tufayl (died in 1185), and in the Western world Jean-Jacques Rousseau (died in 1778), while some in popular literature have taken it off some contemporary Muslim scholars such as Muhammad Metwalli al-Sha’rawi (died in 1998). I am not keen on depriving these and others of this title, but I believe that the philosopher most deserving of it in all of human history is Ibn Taymiyyah. I do not think that it is an exaggeration if we decide that Ibn Taymiyyah places all his resources in the basket of fitra, as he believes in the natural state, proceeds from it, struggles for it, preserves it, and develops it in terms of thinking, morals, and behavior. Ibn Taymiyyah succeeded ably in innating philosophy, thinking, and behavior, as will become clear to us in his unique model. Here, a methodological question arises: How can such an arbitrary description be proven, since it may be purely subjective?
Taimiyyan Model of Fitra
By following and analyzing Ibn Taymiyyah’s proposals in the two previously mentioned books, it becomes clear to us not only the enormous quantitative presence of the concept of fitra and its synonyms in the Taymiyyian text, which are in thousands, nor only the heavy qualitative description of this concept, but it also becomes clear to us that we are facing an unprecedented comprehensive scientific model of fitra. This is because, for him, fitra is a comprehensive, integrated, multi-dimensional construct, to the extent that fitrah itself becomes the definition or characterization of the human essence (the human being’s core), whether from the perspective of religion, reason, senses, or language. Someone may say that a number of the ideas contained in the model are presented in other scholars than Ibn Taymiyyah, and this is a good and correct observation. However, I declare that the dimensions of the model are more complete, deeper and clearer with Ibn Taymiyyah, and this is what distinguishes him in this field, and what makes his model unique, which can be presented in the figure bellow:
(Image not showing)
Here, many methodological questions arise: How was this model formed? How was the writer able to formulate it in the above manner? Where did he get these dimensions from specifically? Why only four? There is a general answer to these difficult questions (suitable for this brief text), which is that the accumulated reading of the Tayyimian text makes you feel these four general dimensions in a clear way, and the additional rounds of reading and analysis enable you to reach conclusions regarding the sub-dimensions, using the processes of analysis, abstraction, linking, and synthesis by activating the research methodology (Qualitative).
The starting points of Ibn Taymiyyah’s articulation of the concept of fitra have two complementary and mutually reinforcing dimensions. The first is a foundational, religious-faith based dimension. The second is a culminating, rational-philosophical dimension. For example, he rejects the idea that “the heart is like a blank slate that can accept the writing of faith or the writing of disbelief, and it is not more inclined towards one than the other. This is a corrupt view, because in that case there would be no difference, in relation to fitra, between knowledge and denial, Judaization and Christianization and Islam; rather, that difference is according to the respective causes.” In the same direction, we see him stating that “whoever is closer to the rational fitra and the prophetic law, the more precise their way will be…”, as will become clear to us in analyzing the dimensions of fitra according to the Taymiyyan model of fitra, with our focus more on the frameworks related to the mental aspects.
In order to clarify the dimensions of fitra on the one hand in the Taymiyyan model, and to demonstrate them on the other hand, we must systematically address these dimensions with the evidence indicating them in Ibn Taymiyyah’s texts, but that is beyond the scope of this small text except for quick hints (the details will be in the full text).
1- Generality
1-1 Pre-existence
1-2 Justice
The idea of fitra flashes a direct meaning, which is that, in its rational and psychological dimensions, it is “centred” in humans – as in the frequent expression of Ibn Taymiyyah –. This brings us to the first dimension, which is “generality”, as it is not specific to any particular culture or society. In determining this dimension, Ibn Taymiyyah relies on decisive Qur’anic texts, such as: “So direct your face toward the religion, inclining to truth. [Adhere to] the fitrah of Allah upon which He has created [all] people. No change should there be in the creation of Allah. That is the correct religion, but most of the people do not know” (Ar-Rum: 30).
This dimension, generality, includes sub-dimensions, the most important of which is “pre-existence.” The fact that fitra is general for all people necessarily requires that the natural religious, rational, and psychological dimensions be “pre-existent,” meaning that they fall within the original settings of humanity, as they are compounded by all of them without exception. Ibn Taymiyyah said this truth in different forms and with various examples, including his repetition of the description “a necessary fitra,” and his saying: “As for recognizing the Creator, it is a necessary knowledge obligated for human, and no one neglects it to the point of not knowing it. It must be known, even if he may have forgotten it. This is why introducing the recognition of the Creator is called a reminder, because it is a reminder of natural knowledge that the servant may forget, as Allah Almighty said: “And be not like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget themselves. Those are the defiantly disobedient.” (Al-Hashr: 19).” With his report that “the sciences of number, arithmetic, and others, if imagined, are necessary sciences, but many people are oblivious of them”. This also includes what he pointed out regarding the issue of the fitra knowledge that “a result must have a cause”, as he states with absolute certainty that “the knowledge of this is established in the nature of all people, even children, to the point that if a boy sees a blow to his head, he says: who hit me? And cried until he knew who had hit him… and he does not need evidence of this natural knowledge that was inclined for him.”
On the other hand, the fact that fitra is general to all people means that it is a divine tool for achieving “religious justice,” “psychological justice,” “intellectual justice,” and “linguistic justice”. People are equal in the presence of what achieves spiritual sufficiency, emotional satisfaction, mental efficiency and linguistic effectiveness in terms of the origin of the existence of these things, provided that a degree of disparity occurs among their intrinsic abilities according to equations that make some of them superior to others in one aspect or another (=individual differences), in order to achieve another goal, which is societal integration in accordance with the principle of subjugation and affliction. Among Taymiyyah’s texts that indicates this meaning is his wonderful indication that people in general clearly realize that they do not need to use lengthy deductive methods other than realizing the corruption of these methods or some of them, since they require high mental abilities (such as critical thinking). He says: “So whoever says knowledge is by proving the Creator’s and believing of His Messengers is dependent on it, their mistake has become evident to everyone’s mind, just as their contradiction to the religion of Islam is necessarily known. It is known by necessity, that the Messenger, may Allah’s blessing and peace be upon him, and the Companions and Followers, did not call on any of the people to acknowledge the Creator and His Messengers in this way, nor did they provide evidence for anyone with this argument, nor did they follow this path in their knowledge, nor did they obtain knowledge by this type of innovated consideration and reasoning which Allah has spared us from, and the need for it has become apparent to every rational person. Then knowing the corruption of this path through reason is better than knowing that it is indispensable. This is why many people appear indispensable to it, before its corruption becomes apparent to them.”
2- Spontaneity
2-1 Clarity
2-2 Simplicity
Humans are the only beings that involve themself with an increasing amount of mystery and complexity. Only fitra is capable of returning a person to the state of clarity and simplicity. For example, we find him pointing out that “the introductions to rational evidence that contradict hearing have such lengthiness, concealment, suspicion, disagreement, and confusion that it is necessary for corruption to touch upon them greater than it addresses the introductions to auditory evidence,” with the possibility of “forwarding that logic on this logic” according to the evidential strength. To deepen mental spontaneity, for example, Ibn Taymiyyah states that the mind is created to imagine “partial” issues before “universal” issues, because the partial ones are clearer, easier, and closer to intuition, including his saying: “And know that the knowledge of human beings is that every result must have a cause, or every possible must have an obligation, or every poor must have a rich, or everything created must have a creator. Besides other such universal issues and general news are comprehensive knowledge of a universal issue and that is the human beings right, but their knowledge that this specific result must have a cause, and this specific possible must have an obligation that is also known to them, even though the issue is specific, particular, and partial. The human beings knowledge of these specific, particular issues is not dependent on knowledge of that universal, general issue. This is like the knowledge that writing must be done by a writer, and the structure must have a constructor… and so it is with all universal issues, for it may be that human’s knowledge of judgment in its specific, partial entities is more apparent to the mind than the universal judgment”.
3- Suitability
3-1 Health
3-2 Efficacy
According to Taymiyyan model, fitra always succeeds in leading humans to: health in what they lack in health (=knowledge), and effectiveness in where they need it (=work). One of the manifestations of this health and effectiveness is Ibn Taymiyyah’s assertion that there are matters that do not lack evidence in the first place, including the need of a structure to a constructor and so on. “No one of the sane doubts these specific, partial issues, and no one lacks evidence in knowledge of them… That is why the nature of creation was innate that whenever they witness any of the recurring events such as thunder, lightning, and earthquakes, they remember Allah and glorify Him, because they know that this iterated phenomenon did not cause itself, but rather is created by a Creator.” In order to root the foundations of health and efficiency, Ibn Taymiyyah stresses that “the essential sciences are the origin of the theoretical sciences”, while acknowledging that it is difficult to prove such essential innate sciences, either for rational or linguistic considerations. He says: “Either because of the lengthiness of the introductions, or because of their subtlety, or because of both matters. The inferrer may be unable to organize evidence for this, either because of the inability to imagine it, or because of the inability to express it, for not everything that a person has imagined can be expressed by everyone in speech. The listener may not be able to understand that evidence.”
One of the aspects of Ibn Taymiyyah’s natural suitability is his great reliance on “linguistic analysis” in various issues. He establishes this analysis in which he excelled in theory and application, considering it one of the most important methodological tools in dealing with issues and phenomena.
4- Vastness
4-1 Flexibility
4-2 Innovativeness
The universality and spontaneity of fitra leads to expansive mental and psychological horizons, with no restrictive limits on the scope of the intellect and psyche. Ibn Taymiyyah affirms “mental flexibility” in many contexts, including his assertion that “proving the creator is possible in many ways”, and his emphasis that “a sign, a denotation, and an indication of a thing must be proven necessitated by the proof of the evidence for which it is a sign and a denotation, and it does not lack in being a sign, a denotation, or an indication until it falls under a universal issue”. In order to mitigate the possible negative effects of this flexibility and limit Its unlimited flow, while seeking to consider the context, he states that “the one who infers with evidence does not have to mention and deny everything that may come to the hearts of the ignorant, for there is no end to it. Rather, they must deny the possibilities that are valid, and there is no doubt that the validity of possibilities varies depending on the circumstances.”
In order to establish the principle of “mental innovation,” he resorts to what can be described as “breaking up the intelligible” into “intelligibles” so that fitra becomes a ladder to a kind of “demonstrative vastness,” where he states, for example, that “if we nullify what opposes hearing, we only nullify a kind of what is called reasonable, we have not invalidated every intelligible, nor have we invalidated the intelligible by which the validity of what is transmitted is known.” While acknowledging the existence of limits to the mind “and he knows that his mind is limited”, and to confirm these mental limits, he states that “the Messengers do not inform of the impossibilities of minds, rather, through the uncertainty of minds, they do not tell what the mind knows is absent, but they tell what the mind is unable to know.”
The Taymiyyan model of fitra is worthy of contemplation on the one hand, and application on the other hand, because it is capable, I believe, of generalizing the patterns of spontaneity, suitability, and vastness in the mental, psychological, religious, and value aspects of the contemporary human beings. All while saving them from the restlessness of their soul, the complexity of their mind, the irritability of their selves, and the ambiguity of their language, and the loss of their compass.
T1658
