Chapter on One Who Enters an Act Not Intending God by It

Chapter on One Who Enters into a Deed Not Intended by God — the Exalted — and How His Deed Shall Be After Repentance

I said: The servant performs a deed, beginning it with what God — Mighty and Glorious — does not intend, and he intends thereby one of the people's [goals]: either to ward off their blame, or out of greed for what is in their hands. Then he repents of his intention while still in the deed, before he finishes it. How shall his deed be after repentance?

He said: As for all the deeds, he does not receive credit in them for what has passed; rather, he should recommence a fresh beginning of that first deed, if he wishes the supererogatory act (nafila) that he began to be completed for him.

Like a sura — he recites part of it, then remembers, and so he begins it again from its start — and likewise what resembles that, except for the prayer. One group said: He abandons all of that, because it has been nullified. Then he starts afresh and repeats what he had done of recitation, or of bowing (ruku'), or prostration (sujud) that came after the opening takbir.

I said: And why have you singled out the opening takbir, the ihram [TN: the state of consecration for prayer or pilgrimage], and the binding intention of fasting — that riya' (ostentation) does not corrupt them while it corrupts what is besides them?

He said: Because the opening takbir was made a consecration (tahrim) for the prayer, and riya' only contracted in his qalb (heart) regarding the ihram, and the binding intention of fasting. So it is as though he opened the prayer with poetry and faced other than the qibla — the opening takbir is not invalidated, because through it he enters the consecration of prayer, while what is besides it is invalidated.

Another group said: He recommences the opening takbir, the binding intention of fasting, and the ihram, and so he receives no credit for them. For even though through it he entered the consecration for entering into the prayer, he did not do that for God — Mighty and Glorious — but rather did it for creation. So all of that is invalid. Nothing [counts] except what is intended for God — Mighty and Glorious — alone.

Another group said: Let him seek forgiveness and complete what remains of his prayer, his pilgrimage, and his fasting, and count what has passed. For deeds are [judged] by their conclusions, and he has concluded his prayer with ikhlas (sincerity), just as [one concludes] his prayer and his fasting.

For the servant's pilgrimage argument [TN: hujja — proof/pilgrimage context unclear due to OCR damage], through ostentation (riya'), all his works are nullified — «what has passed of it and what remains» [cf. the entirety of his deed]. And he does not bow nor prostrate except for God, Exalted and Glorious, toward the qibla. If he had performed it for other than God, Exalted and Glorious, he would have been a disbeliever.

If he prayed for God, Exalted and Glorious, out of faith, then intended one of them [i.e., ostentation], and then felt remorse, let him seek reward for what has passed, for it is sincere (ikhlas).

It is only like a white garment that you stained with black, then you washed it and it became clean, «and it returned to whiteness.» Likewise his opening [of the prayer], his recitation, his bowing (ruku'), and his prostration (sujud) are worship for God, Exalted and Glorious — there is no god other than Him.

So when he felt remorse and sought forgiveness and intended to make it purely for God, Exalted and Glorious, alone, the knot of ostentation was dissolved, and what remained was upon the foundation of his submission to God, Exalted and Glorious. He has indeed purified [his deed] in quality, and it became for God alone, because before finishing the deed, he had already renounced, with respect to what had passed of the deed, [seeking] the regard of created beings. His soul was displeased that he should be praised for it, and he felt remorse lest he not have been ignorant [of his state]. And God, Exalted and Glorious, intended this of him before his entering into his deed. This suffices him from repeating what has passed, since He sealed his deed with sincerity (ikhlas). Indeed, deeds are [judged] by their conclusions.

The distinction is that prayer, in the view of the scholars, is not resembled by anything among other deeds, except that the consecration (ihram) for the pilgrimage (hajj) is "more binding" in the contract of entry. However, one is not permitted to abandon it; rather, one must complete what God, Exalted and Glorious, has made obligatory upon him — that he not leave it without [completing] the circumambulation (tawaf) of the House, and [likewise] the sunna of the Prophet, peace be upon him. So when [ostentation] occurs, he must feel remorse over the ostentation, and he is not permitted to exit from it.

I said: If God, Exalted and Glorious, has concealed [my faults] from me, and cast love for me among the brethren, neighbors, and acquaintances, and they displayed praise and commendation for me, and my heart (qalb) gives me firm resolve that he does not desire their praise and does not seek any one of them — should one fear that such contentment (rida) might be a delusion and deception?

He said: That is upon two meanings: one of them is that you be truthful (sadiq) in that, not feeling secure in their praise —

among the meanings — is that you give thanks to God, Exalted and Glorious, for His concealment of you, while you may have inclined toward their praise and your soul found rest in that, and you give from your heart the dislike upon deception and delusion.

That is because the nafs (soul), when it attains what it loves from the servants' praise, does not care to give dislike — not out of any diminishment from what it loves, for it has already attained what it loves. The likeness of that is a man who has enough to suffice him and has those who spend on him, and he says: "I have placed my tawakkul (reliant trust) upon God," and "What concern have I with provision?" It is suggested to him that this is yaqīn (certainty) from him and tawakkul (trust), but his tranquility and his confidence are only in the sufficiency and the provision flowing to him, and his soul shows him and makes him imagine that this is certainty from him and trust.

You said: By what do I distinguish between these two meanings?

He said: When they change, or some of them change away from praise. If you see that your soul does not grieve except for passing thoughts that you do not control while they are merely fleeting, then know that it is truthful in negating their praise, and were it not that it was indifferent to their denial, its grief at its loss would not have been slight.

But if it grieves, and what occurs to your heart from their change away from praising you is something you can barely expel, and your heart becomes preoccupied with it — then this is the proof of the fear that the soul had been inclining and desiring their praise. Were it not for that, it would not have grieved except with a passing sorrow repelled by the intellect away from God, Exalted and Glorious.

Were it not that what it loves has been stripped from it, it would not have grieved. Rather, it may grieve on mere suspicion, short of certainty — out of dislike that they may have thought of you something other than what they used to know you by, until your heart becomes preoccupied with that.

And perhaps you become distressed lest you fall in the estimation of one whose mention of you would not be believed against you. And you make excuses with lies, and you swear by faith, and you stay awake at night in thought. And if you learn that they have become certain of your sin, your preoccupation