Here we present the proofs of both disputing groups (the...

Here we present the proofs of both disputing groups (the so-called intellectuals and the so-called pious) and investigate them so that by critiquing them we can slowly arrive at the third logic in regard to this issue, that is, the logic and particular philosophy of the Qur’ān. The So-Called Intellectuals This group brings two types of proofs for their view: rational and narrational. 1. Rational proof.

The rational demonstration that says that good deeds entail their reward no matter who performs them is based on two premises: The first premise: God has an equal relation to all existent beings. His relation to all times and places is the same; just as God is in the East, He is in the West, and just as He is above, He is below. God is in the present, past and future; the past, present, and future have no difference for God, just as above and below and East and West are the same for Him.

Similarly His servants and creation are also the same for Him; He has neither family ties nor a special relationship with anyone. Thus, God’s showing grace or showing anger towards people is also the same, except when there are differences in the people themselves.[^1] As a result, no one is dear to God without reason, and no one is lowly or outcast without justification. God has neither ties of kinship nor of nationality with anyone; and no one is the beloved or chosen one of God.

Since God’s relation to all beings is the same, there remains no reason for a good deed to be accepted from one person and not from another. If the actions are the same, their reward will also be the same, since the assumption is that God’s relation to all people is the same. So justice demands that God reward all those who do good whether Muslims or non-Muslims in the same way. The second premise: The goodness or badness of actions is not based on convention, but on actual reality.

In the terminology of scholars of theology and the science of principles of jurisprudence, the “goodness” or “badness” of actions is innate. That is, good and bad deeds are differentiated by their essence; good deeds are good by their essence, and bad deeds are bad by their essence. Honesty, virtue, doing good, helping others, and so forth are good by their essence and lying, stealing, and oppression are bad by their essence.

The goodness of “honesty” or badness of “lying” is not because God has mandated the former and forbidden the latter.