- With a brief survey of ‘good’ and ‘evil’, reward and punishment
This is one of the most misunderstood concepts among Muslims, especially in the Indian sub-continent and its diaspora in the West. Any number of good things are done ‘in the name’ of the departed, and it is expected that he or she will benefit from them in the Hereafter. The most common of these good deeds is ‘finishing’ the Quran (called khatam) or reciting some Arabic formula so many thousands of times ‘for the benefit of the deceased’.
For starters, the concept of sawaab (as usually understood) is itself flawed. Especially when it comes to the Quran, which repeatedly claims that it is a book of guidance. The Quran is therefore supposed to be understood and implemented in one’s life. The ‘reward’ for reading the Quran then is guidance and the ability to differentiate between what is true and what is false. (Can one think of a superior reward?). There can be no guidance or wisdom without understanding. Therefore, the thought of donating the ‘sawaab’ of reciting the Quran to others (living or dead) hardly even means anything.
This whole sawaab/gunaah (sin) thing probably needs to be revisited as far as many Muslims are concerned. It is one of the legacies and influences of Christianity that there is way too much emphasis on sawaab and gunah. From the human viewpoint good and evil are those things that are beneficial and harmful, respectively, for mankind. Gary Miller made a telling point when he said that you are not punished for your ‘sins’; you are punished by your ‘sins’. Evil done brings evil to the doer, even if momentarily (and from the outside) it may appear that one has gotten away with it. That is the nature of evil. By doing something harmful one triggers a chain of events that has its effects as certain as the putting in motion of a physical reaction. What holds for punishment also holds for rewards. So, one could employ Miller’s phraseology to say that you are not rewarded for your good deeds; you are rewarded by your good deeds. Good done brings good to the doer, even if momentarily (and from the outside) it may appear that one is not benefitting from it. That is the nature of good. By doing something beneficial one triggers a chain of events that has its effects as certain as the putting in motion of a physical reaction.
So, one could employ Miller’s phraseology to say that you are not rewarded for your good deeds; you are rewarded by your good deeds. Good done brings good to the doer, even if momentarily (and from the outside) it may appear that one is not benefitting from it. That is the nature of good. By doing something beneficial one triggers a chain of events that has its effects as certain as the putting in motion of a physical reaction.
Now, there is certainly no reason for this chain of events to stop when one dies. Indeed, in Islam there’s this concept of sadqa-e-jaariya (ongoing charity), which means that if somebody plants a seed with the intention of benefitting people and it grows into a tree, then he will be credited with the reward (even after his death) as long as people keep benefitting from its shade and fruit. And that is only fair, for the man initiated a good thing that was of a sustaining nature. Now, ongoing-charity is not limited to things like planting of trees or digging water-wells alone. If a man takes pains to inculcate in his progeny the habit of saying prayers (for example), then that too would benefit him after his death, for he started a good thing that outlived him. But it doesn’t stand to reason why a man should benefit (while living or posthumously) from something that he never bothered to practice in his life much less encouraged others to do, even if some people are considerate enough to ‘donate’ the reward to him? There are no two ways about it: in Islam, a man only gets what he strives for [53:39].
This is understandably a deeply emotional issue with many people. Can we then do nothing to improve the lot of our loved ones who have moved on, they ask. Well, one can always pray for the deceased and remember them fondly, although prayers and fond memories again benefit the one praying and doing the remembering more than anybody else (supplication is another nuanced subject, to be discussed another day). It is certainly a good idea to be persistent in doing any good things taught/encouraged by the departed; and every man has to his credit more or less of such things. But apart from any sadqa-e-jaariya that he initiated in his life, a man’s ledger is closed with his death. This isn’t such a gloomy thought either, for it is equally reassuring as well. If a man does not benefit from any good deeds (in which he played no part himself) after him, then he doesn’t get punished either for any evil (towards which he played no role in his life) perpetrated after he is gone.
