100

favour (divine)

Tawlt al-Qurn, 2 vols., Beirut n.d.; (hud, hidya) with which God is believed
al-Qurub, Jmi li-akm al-Qurn, 11 vols., to favour humans, the other being instruc-
Beirut 1408/1988, repr. Beirut 1413/1993;
Sayyid Qub, F ill al-Qurn, 6 vols., Cairo tion (irshd), provided through the medium
1972; al-Rz, Maft al-ghayb, 11 vols., Bei- of prophetic teachings.
rut 1415/1995; Abd al-Ramn al-Sad, The Qurn depicts divine providence
Taysr al-karm al-ramn, Beirut 1426/2005; in a wide variety of ways, most notably
al-Samarqand, Bar al-ulm, ed. Mamd
Maraj, 3 vols., Beirut 2006; al-abar, in terms of the bestowal of sustenance
Jmi al-bayn, 30 vols., Beirut 1323/1905, (rizq, e.g., Q 2:60; 5:114) and grace ( fal,
repr. Beirut 1412/1992. e.g., Q 2:64; 34:10) on humans. God is
described as being benevolent (laf ) to
Studies
Mohammed Arkoun, Lectures du Coran (Paris His creatures (e.g., Q 12:101; 22:62;
1982), 46–67; Michel Cuypers, Une analyse 42:18); it is from this adjective that the
rhétorique du début et de la fin du Coran, Mutazila derived their term of choice,
Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques luf   , which is said to denote, in ordinary
90 (2006), 233–72; William A. Graham,
Ftia, EQ; Adel Théodore Khoury, Der language, kindness (rifq) and assistance
Koran (Düsseldorf 2005), 140–1; Angelika (mana) (Abd al-Jabbr, vol. 13, 9–11). As
Neuwirth and Karl Neuwirth, Srat al-Ftia. a more narrowly defined theological term,
“Eröffnung” des Text-Corpus Koran oder luf refers specifically to the assistance by
“Introitus der Gebetsliturgie”?, in Walter
Gross, Hubert Irsigler, and Theodor Seidl which God motivates human beings to
(eds.), Text, Methode und Grammatik. Wolfgang enhance their moral and soteriological
Richter zum 65. Geburtstag (Sankt Ottilien standing, as opposed to worldly aspects of
1991), 331–57; Rudolf Paret, Ftia, EI2; divine providence.
Uri Rubin, Exegesis and adth. The case
of the seven Mathn, in Gerald R. Haw- The Mutazila held almost unanimously
ting and Abdul-Kader A. Shareef (eds.), that the provision of luf is obligatory on
Approaches to the Qurn (London and New God, the chief exception being Bishr b.
York 1993), 141–56; Arent Jan Wensinck, al-Mutamir (d. 210/825), an early mem-
Concordance et indices de la tradition musul-
mane, Leiden 1882–1939, 19922; Lodovico ber of the Baghdd current of the school
Zamboni, Il Corano nella sapienza islamica. Il (van Ess, TG, 3, 121ff.). As an aspect of
testo sacro dell’Islam secondo i commenti tradiz- the Mutazil theory of God’s justice (adl),
ionali. 1. La sura aprente (Campegine, Reggio the doctrine of divine favour is secondary
Emilia 2008), 151–344 (trans. of Ibn Arab,
al-Futt al-makkiyya, chap. 5). to the more primary tenets, that goodness
and badness are real and objective prop-
Ida Zilio-Grandi erties of acts, and as such discernible to
the mind, and that God is hence obliged,
as a moral agent, to refrain from bad acts
Favour (divine) and to perform duties. He took on one set
of providential duties as soon as He cre-
Divine favour (luf, tawfq) is the ated human beings, who, as moral agents
notion that God assists human beings by themselves, are subject to certain obliga-
inspiring them to perform good acts and tions of their own (a condition known as
to refrain from bad ones and is the sub- taklf ), and hence accountable for their
ject of a major theological doctrine pro- acts in the hereafter and liable to suffer
pounded by the Mutazila and contested an eternity of punishment in hell or to be
by their adversaries. This form of assis- rewarded in heaven. These divine obliga-
tance is one of the two types of guidance tions towards humans, it is argued, hinge
favour (divine) 101

on the notion that God, as beneficent cre- disadvantages, provisions or deprivations

ator, wills benefit (al) for human beings (al-Zamakhshar, 67). Some alf are cre-
and so must bring about circumstances ated by God, including many cases of
conducive to their attainment of happiness illness and other forms of suffering and
and avoidance of misery in the hereafter. hardship, which may serve as lessons or
His first obligation is to provide them ordeals. Others are commanded by God
with the means to fulfil their obligations; but performed by the recipient of the
for instance, intellect, with which they can assistance, the main example being acts
distinguish good and bad acts; volition, of worship enjoined in revelation, which
which enables them to choose freely; and serve as reminders. If an instance of luf
the capacity (qudra) to produce their own is followed by the agent’s performance of
acts (Abd al-Jabbr, 11, 367ff.). A good a good act, it can be described as “acting
creator, according to the Mutazila, does in accord with God’s favour” (tawfq). If
not then leave His creatures to their own followed by refraining from a bad act, it is
devices but is obliged to provide them with described as “prevention of error” (ima).
two types of guidance: instructional, which Prophets are infallible (mam), because
takes the form of prophetic teachings, and error is prevented in all their acts.
motivational, termed luf. God is required Beyond Mutazilism, the belief in divine
to motivate humans to make the right providence, including God’s day-to-day
choices, because obligations involve hard- guidance and assistance to believers, is
ship (mashaqqa) and are hence inherently central to the popular theology of Muslims
unattractive choices of action. Although but nonetheless features as only a minor
agents are motivated by their knowledge subject in formal theology. Most Sunn
of the ethical properties of acts to perform theologians oppose the Mutazil doctrine
good acts and refrain from bad ones, they that God is under ethical obligations and
also come under the formidable sway of therefore understand all forms of assistance
“motives of need,” which often urge them He provides to His creatures as acts of
to act differently. Yet no matter the qual- favour, as opposed to duties. Drawing on
ity and quantity of any particular instance the Qurn (e.g., Q 3:160; 74:31), Ashars
of assistance that God bestows on an indi- further maintain that God also forsakes
vidual, it can only make a certain choice (khidhln) some people by motivating them
of action more compelling and likely than to commit bad acts, although this does
another; it does not determine it, as that not undermine His goodness, and that the
would violate the more primary Mutazil assistance God provides does not merely
principle of human free choice (ikhtiyr). affect the likelihood of the choices made
All occurrences intended to motivate by the recipients but, in fact, determines
humans in the manner described consti- them. Some, including Ab al-asan
tute instances of divine assistance (often in al-Ashar (d. 324/936), the founder of the
the plural, alf ). None can be intrinsically school, go further, defining luf and tawfq
bad; God cannot, for instance, lie in order as a capacity (qudra) that God creates
to motivate humans to obey Him. The within the agent, causing him to perform a
exact nature of the alf depends, to some particular act of obedience to the exclusion
extent, on the recipient’s circumstances of any other act, and khidhln as a capacity
and can take the form of advantages or for a particular act of disobedience.
102 fay

Bibliography uted to Muslim fighters as an a (stipend)

and sometimes for other public purposes
Mutazil sources
Abd al-Jabbr, al-Mughn f abwb al-tawd
(mali).
wa-l-adl, various editors, 16 vols., Cairo The verb fa and associated terms
1960–9 (vol. 13, entitled “al-Luf,” contains have the basic meaning of “return.” The
the most extensive discussion of the subject evidence of the Qurn and pre-Islamic
in an extant source); al-Malim, al-Fiq f
ul al-dn, ed. Wilferd Madelung and Mar-
poetry suggests that derivatives of the root
tin J. McDermott (Tehran and Berlin 2007), were used in connection with the taking
251ff.; Mnkdm Shashdw, Shar al-ul al- of spoils in war in pre-Islamic Arabia
khamsa, ed. Abd al-Karm Uthmn (Cairo (Q 33:50, 59:6, 7; Imru al-Qays, 211).
1965), 518–26; al-Zamakhshar, al-Minhj f
ul al-dn, ed. and trans. Sabine Schmidtke,
The classical Islamic distinction between
A Mutazilite creed of az-Zamaarî (d. 538/1144) “spoils” and “revenue” began to take
(Stuttgart 1997), 67ff. shape during the development of the first
Muslim empire, in the first/seventh and
Ashar sources
Ibn Frak, Mujarrad maqlt al-Shaykh Ab
second/eighth centuries. By the mid-sec-
l-asan al-Ashar, ed. Daniel Gimaret (Beirut ond/eighth century the policy of distrib-
1987), 124–30; Sayf al-Dn al-mid, Abkr uting to the conquerors not conquered
al-afkr, ed. Amad Muammad Mahd land but only the revenue from that land
(Cairo 2002), 2:205–10.
had become widespread, with the result
Studies that “spoils” (ghanma) were distinguished
Binyamin Abrahamov, Abd al-Jabbr’s theory from “collective wealth,” or “revenue”
of divine assistance (luf ), JSAI 16 (1993), ( fay). However, the more general sense
41–58 (a translation of the relevant section
in Shashdw’s Shr al-ul); Maha Elkaisy-
of “spoils” did not disappear completely
Friemuth, God and humans in Islamic thought. after the 100s/720s (Simonsen, 141–2; cf.
Abd al-Jabbr, Ibn Sn and al-Ghazl, Abing- Morimoto, 139–44).
don 2006; Margaretha T. Heemskerk, Suf- Contests among Muslims over the
fering in the Mutazilite theology. Abd al-Jabbr’s
teaching on pain and divine justice, Leiden 2000;
resources of the early empire generated
Ayman Shihadeh, Theories of ethical value many of the internal conflicts of the first/
in kalm. A new interpretation, in Sabine seventh and second/eighth centuries, and
Schmidtke (ed.), Oxford handbook of Islamic the- abuse of the fay is the subject of recur-
ology, Oxford, forthcoming 2013.
rent complaints attributed to groups dis-
Ayman Shihadeh satisfied with their place in the new elite.
Al-usayn (d. 61/680) is said to have
accused the Umayyads of “claiming exclu-
Fay sive possession of the fay   ” (al-abar,
2:300). Fair distribution of the fay is said
Fay in classical legal thought is usually to have been one of the principles upon
the collective wealth of Muslims derived which Zayd b. Al’s (d. 122/740) follow-
from the taxation of conquered peoples. ers pledged allegiance (al-abar, 2:1687).
Fay revenue is contrasted, on the one Conversely, those holding power are said
hand, with ghanma, spoils taken through to have invoked the fay as a right to be
battle, and, on the other, with adaqa (or defended against rebels: in 66/685 the
zakt), alms paid by the Muslims them- Qurash Ibn Mu warned his supporters
selves. The fay is usually to be redistrib- that the followers of the rebel al-Mukhtr