Ibn al-Hussain

If you can read Arabic read this paper on Fiqh al-Istikhara which addresses this issue of Azlam as well. The Sunni scholar Shaykh Shaltut actually prohibited Istikhara using these verses and Ayt. Borujerdi had asked some students to write a refutation of him which was then written by Ayt. Safi Gulpaygani. Read from: حرمة الاستخارة (نظرية الشيخ شلتوت)، المستند والدليل Wasalam

Eh...the internet is back after a full day! Felt like forever.

Utterly stupid move on 17th of Rabi ul-Awwal they decided to raise the price by 300%! No announcement, no warning, nothing. One can understand a slight hike in price, that too with some announcements so people could brace for it, but they increased it by 3 times on the day of celebrations. Even some of the offices of the Maraji' have spoken out against such a silly move. Even the discount on the Kaart-e-Sookht is so little!

No.

There was definitely a money factor involved in the Waqifiyyah which cannot be denied, but I do also believe there were some who legitimately ended up believing Kazim was the last Imam. It doesn't really cast doubt on the whole system, more so than any other system where you will have some flaws and fallibles involved. The wakils who were corrupt and went misguided are known and have been discussed in earlier works such as the al-Ghaybah of Tusi - so it wasn't something that the scholars didn't come to terms with and figured out ways to deal with it. As for the selection process and the selector's insight, that may be an issue for those who believe in 'ilm ul-ghayb of that sort and then also believe the Imams have had to act on that ghayb. If someone does not believe in 'ilm ul ghayb of that type, or even if they do yet they do not believe in the second condition and say the Imams have to act upon what is apparent, then this is not really a problem and dilemma. Wasalam

This is old. Robert Hoyland has written a good research paper on it I read some time ago. The phrasing of the sentence leave a lot of room for speculation, as he could have written it in the year 24, but "at the time 'Umar died" could be a reference to the event of the death which was still fresh in the memory as it occurred just a few days or weeks ago.

The jurists who have authenticated this report and have presented it like a historical fact really need to stick to their roles - which is to give fatwas and not act like historians. They can say it is mustahabb to do ghusl on this day if they believe in Qaida al-Tasamuh, but they can't say this report is a historical fact. If they do then I would seriously question their sanity, intelligence and consistency of methodology. The report is not even originally from a Shi'I work, it is from the book of Abu Sa’eed Surur bin Qasim al-Tabarani (358 – 426 Hijri) who was a Nusayri and his book's name is Majmu’ al-A’yad. You need to bring in quotes and views of the historians on this matter as this is a historical matter. I only know a handful of jurists who are also recognized as historians, otherwise most jurists are not recognized as historians - these are two separate sciences and require completely different approaches. A quote by Shahīd Sayed Muḥammad Beheshtī here seems to be relevant (though he is speaking about creed, it is relevant to other non-jurisprudential matters as well) - translation is not mine:

A person has serious epistemic issues and perplexity if they believe the Prophet (p) marrying a 9 year old 1400 years ago would tantamount to a moral crime. Muslims in the modern world really need to get better equipped and familiar with their history and a decent understanding of what has been happening in the world over the past 200 years (particularly in the West) and how the paradigm shift of the last century (and them growing up with these modern paradigms and taking them for granted) causes them to mix theological expectations and ethical value judgements about their law and history. This is a very serious issue impacting most religious Muslim communities - particularly in the West (though the East is pretty much the same at this point). Wasalam

Most of the stories about who was killed on this day and what happened on this day in context of Mukhtar are really just stories without any backing. The works of history detail out what happened during Mukhtar's reign in detail and anyone can go and read them. Most of these stories told today are even worse than some of the stories that get told during Muharram because those stories - even if they are later fabrications - can still be found in at least some works albeit just a few centuries old. But some of the stories surrounding 9th of Rabi' are nothing but folklore. There is a tradition that says when Mukhtar sent the heads of the killers, the women of Bani Hashim began to beautify themselves and so on. But all of that was irrelevant to my discussion because I was not concerned with whether they did that or not. My point was to show that even if they did do something like that, it simply didn't (and rather couldn't have) happened on the 9th of Rabi' al-Awwal. Anyways, I do want to update the article a bit, with some more details I haven't covered and perhaps also a section discussing its relevance to Qa'idah al-Tasamuh and so on. I wrote this article almost 4 years ago and since then my writing style has also improved a lot more and I think I can make the article read a bit better and more fluent than it currently does. Wasalam

Excerpt from: https://www.iqraonline.net/surat-al-inshirah-an-introductory-exegesis-of-the-meanings-and-messages-contained-within There is a question raised in the Quranic sciences, and the answer to it is a starting point that will distinguish the exegetical methodology that a scholar chooses. This question is whether the Qur'an is only a book of information or also a book of moral training and guidance? To clarify the first part of the question, let’s give an example. Suppose you visited a jurist to ask them for a ruling on a jurisprudential matter that concerns you. A jurist, in so far as he is a jurist, doesn’t have a responsibility beyond answering you with a yes or no based on his expert opinion on the matter. The jurist will not usually involve himself in the development of the person and his moral training in order that the person stays away from what is impermissible. Similarly, a mathematician who presents mathematical theories will explain his ideas so that others understand it but is not concerned with anything more than that. As for the second part of the question, let’s also give an example. Suppose you visited a psychiatrist and complained to them of a problem you are suffering from. The psychiatrist will not just suffice themselves with writing a prescription to help cure you. Rather, they will sit you down and have a discussion with you that seeks not to give you information per se, but in order that the very discussion itself acts as a positive help for your situation and improves your psychological state. After these two examples, let us present the question once again: Does the Qur'an play the same role as a jurist, philosopher, physicist or chemist in presenting ideas purely without thinking about a mechanism of ingraining them ideologically within the person’s mind thereby acting as a channel for knowledge that doesn’t have a responsibility beyond delivering information to the other person? Or is the Qur'an – in addition to being a channel for knowledge – a book of moral and spiritual training that seeks to convince its listeners of the ideas it presents, and furthermore seeks through various means to develop a person and deepen their ideas, removing unclarity from them, and thus through itself acting as a cause for human reform and to emphasize ideas that they may have previously known? Undoubtedly, the second option is the correct one. If the Qur'an was merely a book of information, what was the need to bring it down in such disparate stages? It would have been possible for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to give it all at once to His Prophet (p) and the Prophet can subsequently explain this divine information, whilst comparing all its verses, without the need to bring it down in divided stages. The Qur'an, however, plays an important role in building and reforming the Islamic society. One is mistaken if he expects answers akin to the jurists and scientists or considers it similar to a book that presents scientific theories in a dry mechanical style. The Qur'an, in addition to being a book with information, is a book of moral guidance and spiritual refinement, through its style, mode of presentation and its artistic way. The Qur'an aims through its eloquence, the arrangement of its words, its musical effect and its psychological impact to affect its listeners and to enter deeply inside their hearts, not merely to present them with some information. It is thus akin to an ethical scholar who seeks not to merely place information in the mind of his students, but rather act as a moral guide and exemplar for the information he has given them. If we restricted the role of an ethical scholar to just giving ethical information, the value of such scholars would be diminished. Based on this premise, we can address another question: Why does the Qurān repeat itself? [94:5-6] For indeed, after hardship will be ease. Indeed, after hardship will be ease. In Sūrah al-Inshirāḥ, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) twice repeats the point: there will be ease after hardship. There are many other places where the Quranic verses are repeated, either congruently in their words, or with very minor differences conveying the exact meaning. What is the reason behind the Qur'an containing multiple verses saying the same thing? Exegetes have been divided in their understanding of the secret behind this repetition: a) A group of exegetes held the view that there is no repetition of meaning between any two verses, even though the same terms are used. For example, some advocates of this view argue that the basmalah at the start of Sūrah al-Baqara will indicate a different meaning to the basmalah at the start of any other surah. This is because each basmalah is part of a distinct composition that is exclusive to each chapter. This view is based on the premise that repetition is useless and futile. They went as far as to say that such futility is impossible for a wise being such as God. If the meaning was completed in the first text, what need would the second text be trying to fulfil? This is what caused some contemporary exegetes to refuse the idea of repetition for the purposes of emphasis like in these verses and other verses in the Qur'an. As such, “indeed, with hardship comes ease” in the sixth verse must give a different meaning to the fifth verse “for indeed, with hardship comes ease”. This way, the Qur'an is placed – according to them – in its lofty position and we do not attribute pointless repetition to God. b) In contrast to the first view, the second group of exegetes considered it unnecessary to go to these difficult lengths. Rather, repetition for emphasis amongst Arabs is something acceptable. As such, in the case of Sūrah al-Inshirāḥ for example, the second verse wished to emphasize the principle that ease accompanies hardship. A person who faces a hardship must not be overwhelmed by despondency and anxiety, because the Lord will place ease to accompany this hardship. This group of exegetes reject there being any issue with the Qur'an repeating itself, whether its stories or other concepts if this repetition represents a way to emphasize the moral training present in the Qur'an and if it increases the importance of these concepts in the mind and soul of the listener. This is akin to you repeating a concept dozens of times in front of your children. Your purpose is not merely that they know the concept; this is achieved with you mentioning it once, but that the concept is emphasized in their minds and so that they consider it a priority. This way, they can act accordingly. This is one of the main differences between books of information and books of moral training, especially those which use various rhetorical means and tools of influence like the Qur'an. Perhaps for this and other reasons, many narrations state that when a believer reads the Qur'an, he makes himself sad through it and he lives a state of fear, hope and is impacted spiritually and emotionally. This is because the Qur'an is not merely a book of information that has no ability to ability to impact through its content and style. It’s a book of knowledge that uses all the means of influence that purposeful and upright media would use.

Because of Qa'idah al-Tasamuh: https://www.iqraonline.net/the-principle-of-leniency-in-evidences-for-non-obligatory-acts-and-its-jurisdiction/ You can read Shaykh al-Najafi's (Sahib al-Jawahir) discussion on it here: http://lib.eshia.ir/10088/5/43 starts from: وأما الغسل للتاسع من ربيع الأول فقد حكي أنه من فعل أحمد بن إسحاق القمي معللا له بأنه يوم عيد As for Sayyid Sistani, though he and others do not believe in Qa'idah al-Tasamuh, they believe such apparently mustahabb acts (found in weak reports) can be done based on raja matlubiyyah (with the hope of getting a reward). Sayyid Sistani's statements in his Minhaj al-Saliheen (v. 1, pg. 111-112) is more precise: هذه الأغسال قد ثبت استحبابها بدليل معتبر وهي تغني عن الوضوء، وهناك أغسال ُأخر ذكرها الفقهاء (رض) في الأغسال المستحبة، ولكنه لم يثبت عندنا استحبابها ولا بأس بالإتيان بها رجاءً، وهي كثيرة نذكر جملة منها الغُسل في اليوم التاسع والسابع عشر من ربيع الأول These (I.e. ghusls he is discussing on the previous pages) are ghusls whose Istihbab have been proven with reliable evidence, and they suffice for Wudhu; but there are other Mustahabb ghusls which the Fuqaha have mentioned, but their Istihbab have not been proven to us, but there is no problem in performing with with the intention of Raja' (hope) - there are many, we will mention a few: ....ghusl on the 9th and 17th of Rabi' al-Awwal. This does not prove anything about the historical reality of the contents of the report. In fact, if you are sure that a certain report is fabricated, Qa'idah al-Tasamuh will not be applicable. Wasalam

Follow on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IqraOnlineBlog Follow on Instagram: https://instagram.com/aaleimran/ The 11th Imam (a) was able to remain in contact with the general Shī’ī community over a large geographical area through the Wakālah system. The Wakālah system comprised of a large number of agents and representatives who would serve as the point of contact between the Imam and their respective communities. The foundations of this specific system can be traced back to the time of Imam Ṣādiq (a) and its exponential growth can evidently be seen from the time of Imam Kāẓim (a) onwards. After Imam Naqī (a), control of this complex network was transferred over to Imam ‘Askarī (a). There were a number of reasons why this network was developed. Firstly, to tackle the physical distance between the Imams (a) and their followers. Secondly, in cases where the Imams were imprisoned or under house arrest and were permitted to have very little contact with outsiders, it was more convenient to remain in contact with specifically chosen individuals rather than a large number of people – often for the safety of both the followers and the Imams. For example, since 11th Imam was under surveillance by the government, he would have to visit the officials once or twice a week to announce his presence and report on his activities, but some of his followers would try to use this opportunity to stand on both sides of pathway so they could meet him (a). Imam ‘Askarī (a) instead asks these followers to not talk to him or even point towards him as it would cause problems. It has been reported from ‘Alī bin Ja’far al-Ḥalabī who said: We gathered at the military compound to observe Abī Muḥammad (a) on the day of his visit. However, his (a) letter reached (us) with the warning: No one should say their greetings to me, no one should point towards me with their hand, and no one should signal (towards me), because your lives are not safe. Another reason a number of scholars have mentioned is that the Wakālah system foreshadowed what the Shī’ī community would have to deal with in the near future and allowed them to prepare for a smoother transition into the period of occultation of the 12th Imam. In other words, by the time of the occultation, much of the Shī’ī community was very much used to not having direct contact with an Imam, or rather, having contact with them through chosen representatives. Some of the tasks these agents would perform were the collection and delivery of letters, gifts, khums, zakāt, different types of endowments, and at times even addressing communal issues in their cities. By mid-third century hijrī, the network extended over four large areas: The Arabian Peninsula, Iraq, Iran and Transoxiana – though some reports indicate there were a couple of agents even in some cities in Africa. Much of the communication between the Imam (a) and the communities was occurring through letters. One of the famous agents, Aḥmad b. Isḥāq had to ask Imam ‘Askarī (a) for a sample of his (a) handwriting so that he would be able to recognize it from any possible attempts of forgery by government officials. Aḥmad says: “Once I went to see Abū Muḥammad (a) and asked him (a) to write for me few lines so that whenever I see his (a) handwriting I can recognize it. The Imam (a) said, ‘Yes,’ and then said, ‘O Aḥmad the writing with a fine pen and with thick pen will look different to you. Do not have doubts.” He (a) then asked for a pen and inkpot and began writing. One of these agents was ‘Uthmān b. Sa’īd al-‘Amrī who grew up in the house of Imam Jawād (a) from the age of 11, then became a wakīl for Imam Naqī (a) and ‘Askarī (a). His significance was such that he also became the first nā’ib of the 12th Imam (a). ‘Uthmān b. Sa’īd eventually began residing in Baghdad, disguising himself as an oil seller. If the Shī’a had to deliver that which was obligatory upon them to Imam ‘Askarī (a), they would send it to ‘Uthmān who would put their money or any other items in containers of clarified butter due to dissimulation and fear and carry it to Imam ‘Askarī (a) in Sāmarra. Another important agent was Aḥmad b. Isḥāq b. Sa’d al-Ash’arī, mentioned earlier. He was a wakīl of Imam Naqī (a) and ‘Askarī (a) in Qom and during the occultation he moved from Qom to Baghdad and became a close assistant of the aforementioned ‘Uthmān b. Sa’īd. Aḥmad’s significance was such that he was also the senior-most scholar in Qom during his time, whose narrations can be found in Shī’ī works of ḥadīth. He trained numerous students and had written a number of works. After Imam ‘Askarī (a), Aḥmad was one of the individuals who demonstrated that the brother of the 11th Imam, Ja’far – who at the time was claiming to be the Imam himself – could not have been the Imam and God’s authority on Earth. There is no denying that there was definitely a degree of confusion in the Shī’ī communities after the 11th Imam, but nevertheless, a lot of this confusion was contained and dealt with by these very agents and representatives who had garnered the trust of their communities over the decades. This is true not just in the case of the 12th Imam but as well as when confusion arose amongst some communities after the demise of any one of the previous Imams (a). In a meeting Imam ‘Askarī (a) has with Aḥmad b. Isḥāq after the Imamate had transferred to him from the 10th Imam, he (a) asks him about the people of Qom and whether their confusion regarding who the next Imam was had been dispelled. Aḥmad (a) who was also a wakīl for the 10th Imam in the city of Qom before that, responds to the 11th Imam saying, “O my master, when your letter was received, there was not a man or a woman from amongst us, and neither a young child who had reached a level of understanding, except that they confessed to the truth (of the fact that you are indeed the Imam).” Likewise, when the 12th Imam is born, Imam ‘Askarī (a) sends Aḥmad b. Isḥāq a letter in Qom informing him of the birth of his son. Aḥmad says that a letter was sent in the same handwriting of Imam ‘Askarī (a) in which all of his previous correspondences and letters would be sent, and it said we have been blessed with a child who will remain hidden from people and that the Imam (a) is only informing the closest of his followers. Later when Aḥmad visits the 11th Imam (a), the Imam tells him that if Aḥmad was not seen as a noble individual in front of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and the Imams, he (a) would not have informed him about the birth of his son – who will fill the Earth with justice and equity. The birth of the Mahdī (a) was kept closely guarded and hence many Muslims at the time never came to believe Imam ‘Askari (a) had a son. Few trustworthy individuals – especially from amongst the network of agents – who over the decades had not only gained the trust of the 11th Imam but as well as the trust of their own communities, had been told about the birth and some fortunate enough even had the opportunity to see the 12th Imam. While naturally there was confusion and perplexity in certain segments of the Shī’ī community, this confusion was addressed and dealt with by these agents and as well as Shī’ī scholars over the years. In essence, the Wakālah system and the individual agents themselves paved the path for a smoother transition into the occultation.

Follow on FB: https://www.facebook.com/IqraOnlineBlog/ Many Muslim theologians in their discussions on the Problem of Evil have argued that existence in the material realm and the systems that govern it are the best possible systems (al-niẓām al-aḥsan) that could have been created and that they enjoy excessive good (ziyādah al-khayr) as opposed to excessive evil. Thereafter, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) based on His infinite Love and Beneficence certainly [55:3] created man [95:4] in the best of forms, so that He [18:7] may test them to see which of them is best in conduct. Our lives are a journey where we are meant to improve day by day, working towards nurturing our best possible selves. In order to do so, we must refrain from anything that distances us away from that which is better for us and we ought to remain subservient to the Lordship of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), subscribing to the path He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has ordained for us – [3:19] Indeed, with Allah religion is submission (Islam). One of the prerequisites for self-improvement is to be able to manage our time and to have discipline. One of the greatest tragedies afflicting us in our lives is the loss of time, particularly when caused by lack of discipline and a failure to organize ourselves. This issue afflicts not just the young, but as well as the elders – males and females. Imam ‘Alī (a) in one of his letters advises his children to fear Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and to keep their affairs in a naẓm. When the beads of a rosary are tied together with a string, this act is called naẓm – you give the beads an order, as you count the beads you expect there to be one bead after another, you know how many there are in total, and you know how many times you are meant to recite any given dhikr. Naẓm is the opposite of being disorderly and all over the place. The journey towards nurturing our best possible selves requires us to contemplate over our day to day affairs, make changes to our lifestyle, repent and learn from our past sins and mistakes, increase the amount of good we do, decrease our bad behaviour towards others, and so on. This can only be done effectively when we have discipline in our lives and are able to manage our time appropriately. In the limited lifespan we have, failure to make any improvement on a daily basis is nothing but a loss. Imam Ṣādiq (a) has said, one whose two days are equal has been deceived, one who does not see any improvement in themselves during the course of the day is at loss, and one who is at loss then death is better for them than life.

Original post: https://www.iqraonline.net/disobedience-of-Allah-(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)-is-foolishness/ إِنَّمَا التَّوْبَةُ عَلَى اللَّهِ لِلَّذِينَ يَعْمَلُونَ السُّوءَ بِجَهَالَةٍ ثُمَّ يَتُوبُونَ مِن قَرِيبٍ فَأُولَٰئِكَ يَتُوبُ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا [4:17] [Acceptance of] repentance upon Allah is only for those who commit evil out of ignorance, then repent promptly. It is such whose repentance Allah will accept, and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise. Repentance (al-tawbah) is expected from us when we sin and transgress. However, the scenario in which repentance for sin is expected is when we sin while knowing that a certain act is against Allah’s (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) legislation and commands, yet we engage in it. On the other hand, if a person commits an act without knowledge, it is not technically classified as a sin and therefore one is not expected to repent. This is all the while verse [4:17] cited above says that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) only accepts the repentance of those who commit a sin out of ignorance (jahālah), instead of knowledge (‘ilm). The word jahl in Arabic is homonymous between two meanings: one meaning “absence of knowledge” which is the opposite of ‘ilm, and the other meaning can be loosely translated as foolishness or mindlessness, which is the opposite of ‘aql. For example, Shaykh Kulaynī in his Uṣūl al-Kāfī has a book titled Kitāb al-‘Aql wa al-Jahl, where jahl is used in the opposite of ‘aql – not ‘ilm – hence translated by some as the Book of the Intellect and Foolishness, rather than the book of knowledge and ignorance. The verse in question also uses the word jahalah as the opposite of ‘aql and not as the opposite of ‘ilm. In other words, the verse is saying repentance is for a situation where a person commits an act which the sound intellect does not permit one to do or is against one’s rational intuitions, yet due to the overpowering of one’s desires and lust they engaged in it. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) accepts the repentance of those who commit evil when their sinning is a result of their foolishness, carelessness and mindlessness – while they know it is a sin. This would be in opposition to those who transgress the boundaries laid down by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) while knowing it is a sin, but yet they engage in it due to hypocrisy or disbelief. Mullā Ṣadrā in his commentary on Uṣul al-Kāfī says that the word jahālah in the verse is either grammatically indicating a state of being – meaning they commit evil deeds while they are mindless, or it is an accusative of specification (tamyīz) – meaning they commit evil deeds which originate from foolishness and mindlessness, because committing a sin itself is foolishness and a feigning of ignorance. Hence some scholars have said, anyone who disobeys Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is jāhil (foolish). As for the subsequent verse [4:18] But [acceptance of] repentance is not for those who go on committing misdeeds … these are people who have exceeded in their sins and are accustomed to it. Therefore Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) rejects the repentance of both those amongst the immoral ones who postpone their repentance till the time of their death and those who die upon disbelief. As such, what is meant by [4:17] those who commit evil (al-sū’) are the sinners from amongst the Muslims whose repentance is accepted and [4:18] those who go on committing misdeeds (al-sayyiāt) are the hypocrites whose repentance is not accepted. Furthermore, [4:17] says that the acceptance of repentance is “upon Allah” – the phrase generally indicating a type of obligation. Is the acceptance of repentance rooted in Allah’s (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Justice, or His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Kindness? If He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) decides not to accept someone’s repentance, does that mean He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has been unjust? The scholarly opinion on the matter is that His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) acceptance of our repentance is rooted in His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Kindness, not His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Justice. After Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) granted us capacity, knowledge, innumerable blessings, sent forth Prophets (p) and made all the necessary preliminaries available to us, He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) established His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) argument and evidence upon us – leaving us with no excuse. If despite this a person commits a sin and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) does not accept their repentance, then this is not inherently and initially unjust – it is against his Kindness. Though it can be argued it is also against His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Justice from one perspective, and that is because Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) out of His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Kindness promised to accept our repentance, then not fulfilling this promise would be an act of injustice. In other words, not accepting one’s repentance is not directly against Allah’s (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Justice, rather His acceptance is a fulfillment of His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) promise, which if unfulfilled is an act of injustice. The Qurānic verse acceptance of repentance “upon Allah” is also indicative of the fact that it is something He made necessary for Himself – not that His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) initial Justice necessitated it.

Fluent in speaking English, Urdu and Farsi. Can hold a relatively decent conversation in Arabic. Can make do with broken Punjabi (though I understand it completely). Would love to learn German and French. Wasalam