ভূমিকা

Nahj al-Balaghah and Its Spiritual Teachings (6) - Al-Shia The Scientific and Cultural Website of Shia belief Nahj al-Balaghah and Its Spiritual Teachings (6) 2021-06-22 411 Views Islamic teachings , Imam Ali , The Commander of faithful , Nahj al-Balagha , The Peak of Eloquence In this part of the article titled “Nahj al-Balaghah and Its Spiritual Teachings”, we shall continue our discussions on “Zuhd” (abstention) as one of the important themes of Nahj al-Balaghah here.

Contents The Zahid and the Monk Zuhd and Altruism The Zahid and the Monk We said that Islam encourages zuhd but condemns monasticism. Both the zahid and the ascetic monk seek abstinence from pleasures and enjoyment. But the monk evades life in society and the responsibilities and duties it entails, regarding them as the low and mean facets of worldly existence and taking refuge in mountains or monasteries.

On the other hand, the zahid accepts society with its norms, ideals, duties, and commitments. Both the zahid and the monk are otherworldly, but the zahid is socially otherworldly. Also, their attitudes to abstinence from pleasures are not identical; the monk disdains hygiene and cleanliness and derides married life and procreation. The zahid, on the contrary, considers hygiene and cleanliness, matrimony and parenthood to be a part of his duties.

Both the zahid and the monk are ascetics, but whereas the ‘world’ renounced by the zahid is indulgence and immersion in pleasures, luxuries, and comforts (he rejects the attitude which considers them to be life’s ultimate goal and objective), the ‘world’ renounced by the monk includes life’s work and activity, and the duty and responsibility which go with social life.

That is why the Zahid’s zuhd operates in the midst of social life, and is, therefore, not only compatible with social responsibility and commitment but is moreover a very effective means of discharging them. The difference between the zahid and the monk arises from two different world outlooks. From the viewpoint of the monk, this world and the next are two different spheres, separate from and unrelated to each other.

To him, happiness in this world is not only independent of happiness in the next but is incompatible with it. He considers the two forms of happiness as irreconcilable contradictions. Naturally, that which leads to felicity and happiness in this world is considered different from the works and deeds which lead to success in the Hereafter.