By Rasul Jafariyan¹, translated by Sayyid Ali Imran

Once Again On the Concept of Knowledge Among Muslims

In the third century after Hijra, two intellectual or scientific systems existed among Muslims. One belonged to those who supported Greek philosophy and its integration with the sacred law. The second was the system or paradigm that the traditionists developed based on religious and quasi-religious texts. This group, through numerous works, attempted to interpret the world through religious texts and according to a particular concept of knowledge that arose from transmitted reports and traditions. In opposition to the philosophers and, in their own words, the heretics, they sought to present an intellectual system attributed to religion for understanding the world. Here we will offer explanations of their views on rain, thunder and lightning, and wind, which are among the important natural phenomena in common perception.

A: It is unlikely that the issue of knowledge and religion will be resolved, even for hundreds of years to come. Not only in the East but even now in the West, this issue continues to be debated and has constantly occupied the minds of many. In relation to our discussion, which concerns the third century, we must give a reminder. When we speak historically, our criterion is different from when we theoretically discuss how the connection between the two is conceptualized based on the foundations outlined in religion, according to our own understanding. This means that, for example, in the nineteenth century, from a historical perspective, the discussion of the relationship between science and religion has its own issues. For instance, when for the first time the reform of the educational system in the Muslim world was discussed, mainly at al-Azhar, our question and concern is what conception of natural sciences, medicine, chemistry and the like existed in the minds of believers at that time. It is important for us to know in each historical period, based on the available evidence, what interpretations of the relationship between religion and science were being offered, especially from the time natural sciences arrived from the West. Contrary to the past, when there was a type of integrated educational system that combined religious and worldly sciences, a particular view emerged among devout Muslims that the new sciences are entirely worldly sciences and should not enter the traditional educational system. This is a historical discussion. In earlier centuries, other issues had been raised, such as the views of the Mu‘tazila, or the traditionists, or the synthetic philosophical system of the seventh to tenth centuries, or what later came to be known as Transcendent Theosophy, which lasted until the Qajar period, or Ash‘ari thought, which has dominated a significant part of the Islamic world even until now. In each historical stage, how did these groups view and justify worldly sciences and how did they conceptualize their relationship with religion? These are historical discussions concerning viewpoints, not theoretical discussions which naturally do not pertain to us here.

The present writing will examine the intellectual system of the traditionists and the Akhbari tendency regarding the natural order of the world in the third century, and will refer to texts related to the traditionists, not the philosophers, nor the Mu‘tazila, nor others. The traditionist view of the natural world, which appears in most hadith-based commentaries of the Qur’an, accepts whatever has been transmitted in the form of reports and narrations when presenting certain cosmological ideas, even if such reports contradict the rational certainties of the same era. For example, if a report appears in hadith sources that a serpent possessing one billion and four hundred million mouths has coiled itself around the Throne of God, such a report would not provoke astonishment in anyone. The meaning of this is that when a worldview becomes a paradigm for a group, most of its propositions are accepted because they are consistent with the principles, methods, and sources of that paradigm.

B: We do not know exactly what type of formal cosmological knowledge existed at the time Islam emerged. What is meant here is not the general, common, and scattered views that exist among even the simplest of peoples, but rather a relatively stable intellectual system or paradigm capable of presenting a unified interpretation of the entire world in the minds of people. When Islam arrived, it was clear that the Qur’an was a book of monotheism, prophethood, and the afterlife. Yet whatever the case, the discussion of monotheism involved explaining the relationship between God and this world, the world that stood before people’s eyes. Regardless of whether such a preexisting intellectual system existed or not, in the Qur’an, there are references to cosmology that are independent from monotheism. Still, their form and mode of expression are primarily religious. In other words, any type of cosmological data is put to religious use, and for this reason, there is no attempt to address these topics independently or resolve cosmological questions separate from the doctrine of divine unity.

It was precisely because an independent cosmological system from the perspective of natural science was not presented in the Qur’an that, after one or two centuries, when Greek cosmological ideas entered the Islamic milieu, many Muslims accepted them. Thinkers such as Farabi sought to formulate an agreement between reason and sacred law in concepts and cosmology and to present a coherent and harmonious intellectual picture. The effort to achieve this agreement was extensive, and many scholars of intellectual history in the Islamic world have described it.

C: This project, that is, reconciling the Greek cosmological system with the data found in the Qur’an and Hadith, was not accepted by the majority of scholars, intellectuals, and religious-minded individuals due to various ambiguities, the most important of which seemed to be the intrinsic conflict between the two in matters related to monotheism. Many followed their own path and refused to accept the Greek cosmology even when it was recast in a monotheistic and Qur’anic form. But for those who rejected the Greek cosmological system, the question was: then what type of intellectual system do we accept? In other words, for questions of cosmology, for determining the nature of the natural world, its transformations, changes, and laws, what system do we propose? Not that this question had never existed before, but now the need for it was felt much more clearly.

It seems that many sought to extract from the Qur’an a cosmological system by any means possible. In this regard, the general statements of the Qur’an, even though their primary aim was not to present an independent cosmology, could, with the help of Hadith and reports, contribute to the formulation of such an intellectual system. In these cases, and fundamentally in the view of this group, it was not necessary to answer every question, nor even that every answer be convincing. What mattered was that for each difficulty or issue, some indication could be provided. It appears that the intellectual atmosphere of this system could also draw upon Jewish intellectual traditions or, more precisely, Jewish responses, a context that contributed to the popularity of the cosmological reports transmitted from Ka‘b al-Ahbar, who came to occupy a prominent place in this literature. If the answer to certain questions was unclear, one could refer to other points that were more explicit and emphasize the overall picture.

Here, some of the general principles of the religious doctrine were also employed. That everything observed is the work of God, and if we do not have a clear answer to a question about it, we may say that, since it is from God, there is no need to ask further. This latter point, expressed in various forms, solved the problem. Giving religious answers to cosmological questions in such a way that the conclusion always returned to God gave the matter a sacred aura and virtually ended any objection from critics. If someone raised further questions, it would appear as though they were violating divine boundaries. In other words, monotheism was understood in a way that made God present everywhere and the agent of every change. Many cosmological questions were, in fact, nothing other than questions about the nature and causes of these changes. When God was described as sending down the rain and giving cosmological information about it, and when we know that, within a monotheistic worldview, this rain is a divine mercy, then what need was there to inquire about its nature and cause? If someone persisted and asked more questions, he might be told: Does he doubt the power of God?

Thus, in the new cosmology that emerged with the help of Hadith and transmitted reports, as we will further explain, there was no place for the naturalistic philosophers or the Greek intellectual system. What was needed here was a degree of contentment with limited data, as well as trust in God. Ultimately, one could say that it was simply not beneficial for us to know more than this.

D: We know that in the fields of astronomy and even medicine, it was very common that anyone who stepped even slightly beyond what was considered their proper bounds would be accused of having inclined toward disbelief and of having doubted divine unity. Figures such as Ghazali considered the foundations of Greek philosophy to be a denial of monotheism. As for the field of medicine, the very fact that life is in the hands of God served as an answer to many difficulties and, for some, even negated the legitimacy of medical science. Astronomy was similar, for they sometimes encountered theories suggesting that celestial bodies governed the destinies of human beings, something they naturally saw as contradicting monotheism. Yet beyond these issues, the fundamental matter was that an explanation of the natural world had to be formulated on the basis of religious texts to provide answers to questions comparable to those posed by Greek thought and the intellectual systems that had entered from outside. Here, the philosophers found themselves opposed by the people of the sacred law, each side offering its own answers to these questions. This was especially the case for those who adhered to the Akhbari approach. If they did not find something in the Qur’an, they would try by any means possible to locate its answer in Hadith. The point of contention was that the traditionists regarded themselves as the heirs of the entire religious legacy. They employed not only the Qur’an but all Hadith and transmitted reports in order to present an independent intellectual system in opposition to the philosophical systems they considered foreign, whose adherents they viewed as unbelievers, atheists, heretics, or at the very least eclectic. Yet how they constructed a new intellectual framework, with what system, and through what process, requires serious explanation.

E: To understand how an intellectual system could gradually be formed from transmitted reports and Hadith, one must consult the chapter headings of Hadith books from the third century. One must also examine certain smaller treatises written by some of the more encyclopedic traditionists. A group of traditionists were multi-disciplinary scholars who did not concern themselves solely with religion, jurisprudence, and theology. They also attempted to compose treatises on natural philosophy and to offer answers in that field. The subject matter of these figures, and the headings they selected for their books, extended beyond explicitly religious and legal topics and included subjects that belonged to cosmology, natural science, and empirical fields. Such material can certainly also be found in many Hadith collections and narrative-based Qur’anic commentaries. The Tafsir of Tabari is an ocean of such transmitted material, for he cites these reports when explaining Qur’anic verses that touch upon cosmological themes, bringing them from narrative sources in relation to particular verses.

However, aside from these major works, as noted earlier, there were monographs written by multi-disciplinary traditionists who compiled reports on such topics. The key point is that when we use the term Akhbari, what exactly do we mean? In other words, what were the materials these individuals used as the basis for presenting an intellectual system of the natural world? This can be understood by carefully examining the type of legacy preserved in the domain of Hadith and Athar. According to the formal definition, Hadith refers to what is attributed to the Prophet, and Athar refers to what is transmitted from the Companions and Followers. The circle of the Followers is quite vast, and they were usually the recognized scholars of the Umayyad period, individuals who either interacted with some of the Companions or drew upon the knowledge of the People of the Book and Jewish traditions.

The material transmitted by such individuals acquired a religious and sacred character, and it was this religious aura and sacrality that enabled their answers to various questions to be conveyed and understood by the next generation in the same way that Hadith were. Understanding these conditions requires a certain level of experience, by which I mean experience in examining the books that gather these types of statements and reports. Yet even if one lacks this experience, and I admit that fully grasping the issue may then be somewhat difficult, I still recommend that at least some of the key works in this field be studied and reviewed. One must consider how these statements, whether given by Umar or Uthman or Imam Ali or Ka‘b al-Ahbar or Hasan al-Basri or others, gradually took shape as a cosmological corpus. And by the third century, they came to the aid of the traditionists who needed, in opposition to Greek thought, to construct an intellectual system based on what was transmitted and had taken the form of Hadith, report, and Athar.

F: One of the traditionists of the third century who had particular expertise in this field is Ibn Abi al-Dunya. Abu Bakr Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Ubayd ibn Abi al-Dunya al-Baghdadi, who died in the year 281 AH. His numerous treatises cover a wide range of religious and quasi-religious topics, especially various areas of cosmology. In each of them, he attempts to determine the place of a given phenomenon based on transmitted reports and traditions, and the statements attributed to the Prophet, the Companions, the Followers, and even other figures from the first and second centuries. The subjects he addresses include many titles, and the only suitable description for him is that he was a multi-disciplinary scholar who sought to interpret diverse topics according to the same method of arranging transmitted reports, traditions, and sayings. These reports often lack internal coherence, but one point in them is important: in addition to what they offer concerning a particular phenomenon, their overall framework bears a religious and sacred character. Naturally, a Qur’anic verse or a Prophetic hadith possesses a sacred aspect, but most of the material is attributed to the Companions, whose words gradually came to acquire a sacred quality as well. Alongside them are the reports of the Followers, and at their forefront the statements of figures such as Ka‘b al-Ahbar, who belonged to a group whose sacred legitimacy derived from the Torah, as well as other individuals who, in their own time, had a reputation for piety and purity.

In order to demonstrate the same method I suggested that less experienced readers of Hadith literature and the processes of transmission and compilation should follow, I will review one of the treatises of Ibn Abi al-Dunya. At the outset, I should say that I will not discuss the authenticity or lack thereof of these reports. That is, the issue in this article is not whether these are sound hadith or not, just as I do not intend to examine whether these reports, being statements of Companions, are binding for us. The discussion concerns how this type of worldview is constructed through the use of these reports and traditions. The point is that a traditionist such as Ibn Abi al-Dunya, in the middle of the third century, attempts to present a cosmological intellectual system based on transmitted reports to undermine the appeal of Greek-influenced thought. He knows that his task is to explain and clarify the questions of ordinary people who wish to know about the natural world and its phenomena. Ibn Abi al-Dunya’s idea is that we must derive this intellectual framework and its answers from the heart of transmitted reports, which are sacred. Naturally, Ibn Abi al-Dunya, as an Orthodox Sunni, believed in the sanctity of everything transmitted from the Companions, let alone what was attributed to the Messenger.

The book I will review is Kitab al-Matar wa al-Ra‘d wa al-Barq wa al-Rih. It is a book that deals with rain, thunder, lightning, and wind. He intends to explain these interrelated phenomena, and to this end, he dedicates each section of the book to one of these four topics, providing reports that collectively cover their relationship. He is a traditionist, and his primary interest is to use religious sources to understand every type of phenomenon. The system he knows from religion is one that has an opinion on all religious matters and on these types of subjects as well. In truth, he does not believe that nature is something separate from religion and the religious worldview. Rather, based on that outlook, and within the broader framework of his understanding of God and the world, he clarifies the place of these phenomena. He does not in any way think like the philosophers who hold that such matters have no connection to God. On the contrary, he believes that these are part of monotheism, and that in the design God has set for the world and humankind, these too have a role, and certainly God, or those who speak on His behalf, have expressed views about them. They may function as mercy, just as they may function as punishment. In any case, these are essential components of the religious worldview or religious cosmology. As the title of the book indicates, it is about rain, thunder, lightning, and wind, but the book follows a hadith-based and report-centred structure. This means that in discussing these matters and the explanations offered, he cites the words, actions, or other responses of the Prophet or any other relevant person from among the Companions, the Followers, and the scholars of the early period who expressed such statements.

A Review of the Book Rain and Thunder and Lightning and Wind

The book is divided into four parts: the first on rain, then thunder, then lightning, and finally wind. The author offers no explanations, summaries, or evaluations of the reports. He merely presents whatever transmitted reports and traditions there are on each subject. There may even be a few verses of poetry or a piece of literary prose. The basis of our review is the edition prepared by Tariq Muhammad Saklu’ al-Amudi, published in 1418 AH by Dar Ibn al-Jawzi. The hadith are numbered and total 182 reports and traditions. The editor has identified their sources and evaluated their authenticity using the traditional criteria of Hadith studies.

One point I must again emphasize before reviewing these reports is that we must classify them into certain categories. Some are purely religious and have no relation to a naturalistic or cosmological understanding of these phenomena, such as the recitation of a prayer. Another category consists of reports with a completely natural aspect, such as the idea that rain comes from a particular star, or that winds are divided into northern, southern, dabur, and saba winds. But a third category lies between these two perspectives, possessing both a naturalistic and a religious dimension. A type of connection is established between them. It is at this point that further reflection is needed. In fact, we are searching for a kind of dead end presented by this intellectual system and cosmological framework. That is, relying on a sacred dimension blocks the way for deeper inquiry. In any case, let us now begin the review.

The first report is narrated from Malik, who said: We were with the Messenger. Rain fell. The Prophet lifted his garment so that the rain would touch his body. We asked why he did so, and he replied: “It has only recently come from its Lord, the Mighty and Majestic” (p. 49). Meaning that its meeting with its Lord is fresh. We will see that a similar narration appears as the final report of this book, which contains a total of 182 narrations concerning rain, thunder, lightning, and wind.

The next report is attributed to Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib. He said: We were in the Batha district of Mecca. A cloud appeared. The Prophet said: What do you call this? We said: Sahab. He said: Al-muzn (another word for cloud). Then he said: Between the earth and the sky there is a distance of seventy, one, two, or three years. And so it is for the higher heavens, and he counted up to seven heavens. In them there are seas, and from the bottom to the top of each there is the distance of one heaven to the next (p. 50).

The next report is transmitted from a man named Khalid ibn Ma‘dan al-Kala‘i (d. 103). There is no indication that it is from the Prophet, and it is clear that it is a Jewish report since Kala‘i was a Syrian traditionist whose sources were the transmitted reports of that region. He said: Rain descends from beneath the Throne of God, from heaven to heaven, until it reaches the lowest heaven, where it gathers in a place called Ibram. Then a black cloud arrives, mixes with it, and thereafter God sends it wherever He wills (p. 52).

The editor of the book has also remarked that this narration is from the Isra’iliyyat and that rain comes from this very sky. Nevertheless, the report, like the previous ones, appears in major Sunni sources, and all its references are listed in the footnotes. Therefore, one should not assume that when we say it is a Jewish report, this means it was disregarded or not included in Hadith works.

The next report is from Ikrimah, with no attribution to the Prophet, showing that these types of narratives, aside from two or three exceptions, are generally from such individuals whose transmission chains form the sea of Hadith. Ikrimah said: God sends water down from the seventh heaven. A drop reaches the cloud, a drop as large as a camel, “and the drop falls upon the cloud like a she-camel” (p. 53).

The next report is the question of Ibn Abbas to Ka‘b al-Ahbar, the source of Jewish reports and the one who popularized the concepts common in Jewish communities, concerning whether he had anything about clouds. He replied: Yes. Clouds are the sieve of rain, and if clouds and vapours did not exist, everything on earth would be ruined (p. 53). The idea seems to be that water comes from above and is filtered through clouds before descending.

The next report is again from Khalid ibn Ma‘dan al-Kala‘i, who, because he lived in Syria and was closely associated with Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As, naturally had access to such cosmological Isra’iliyyat. His daughter Abda was also a major channel for the spread of his knowledge. In this report it is stated that in Paradise there is a tree from which clouds rise. Meaning the cloud is like a fruit of that tree. What is black bears fruit and produces rain, while what is white is barren and produces no rain.

The next report is from Ibn Abbas, who said: The temperament (mixture) of rain is from Paradise. When this mixture is small, its blessing is little, and when it is more abundant, its blessing increases.

Ka‘b al-Ahbar also said: Rain is the spouse of the earth. When it arrives, the earth, like a woman awaiting her husband, adorns herself and becomes beautiful and green (p. 54).

In the next report, which has no connection to the Prophet and shows that it is a composite of ancient transmissions from various sources, Isma‘il ibn Salim al-Asadi transmits from Hakam in the explanation of the verse “And We do not send it down except in due measure.” He said: I have been informed that with the rain descend angels more numerous than the children of Adam and Iblis, who count the drops and determine their place, and which plant each drop is meant to water (p. 55).

It is also narrated from Abu Hurayrah that he said: Rain has always fallen in due measure, except in the time of Noah (p. 56).

The next report is a literary and linguistic description of a cloud in the sky, using several rare and poetic vocabulary terms, aimed at demonstrating the literary dimension of the Prophet (p. 57).

The next report, again linguistic in nature, is an account by a Syrian Arab who describes to Hajjaj the clouds he had seen on his journey. After him, other men from different regions relate their observations concerning clouds and rain seen along the road. These reports, which are mostly literary, fall within the category of clouds in Arabic literature and also reflect certain folk beliefs about clouds (pp. 58-60). Several narrations in this same style follow, describing clouds in the sky. The Arabs, suffering from scarcity of water, took comfort in the appearance of a cloud in the sky, composing prose, aphorisms, and rhymed descriptions about it. For example, a girl responding to her father, whose eyesight was weak, when he asked her whether she smelled the scent of rain, offered a description of the clouds in the sky (p. 63). Another report includes a few lines of poetry describing rain (p. 64). On one occasion, a man came from Mecca to Medina and described to Aisha the rain that had fallen in Mecca. He conveyed this in beautiful language. When the Prophet arrived, he said: Do not sadden us (p. 101).

These reports represent a type of “description” of a natural phenomenon that is more concerned with its form, appearance, and literary representation than with its essence. This is a mode very common in Arabic and Persian literature, just as many words may be spoken in describing a lover while contributing nothing to an actual understanding of him, sometimes even distancing a person from such understanding.

Abu Hurayrah narrated from the Prophet that he said: The likeness of my community is the likeness of rain. It is not known whether the beginning of it is better or its end (p. 66).

Ibn Abbas also said: Every year the rain is greater than the year before, but God sends it wherever He wills (p. 68).

In a report narrated from Imam Ali, it is stated that the meaning of “waqir” in the verse “By those that bear waqir” refers to clouds, and “fa al-muqassimati amra” refers to the angels (p. 68).

Another section consists of the supplications that are recited for rain. We know that the formulation of a supplication held significance for Muslims, and here a few examples of prayers from the Messenger are cited (p. 70), along with an example from Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib. These phrases from Abbas appear in an account in which, during a time of drought, Umar asked him, as the Prophet’s uncle, to step forward and supplicate so that God might answer their plea (p. 71). There is also an example of a pre-Islamic rain supplication among the Quraysh, in which Abd al-Muttalib, accompanied by the young Prophet, went to the mountains surrounding Mecca and prayed (p. 72). Rain then came down, and the following verse was composed: “Because of the venerable gray-haired one, God gave rain to our town.” Meaning that God sent rain to the city on account of Abd al-Muttalib.

The next reports continue along these same lines of etiquette and supplication. In one report it is said that Aisha stated: When the Messenger sensed dust and a distinct smell in the sky, he would turn toward the qiblah and seek refuge in God from its harm. But when rain came, he would say: Allahumma sayyiban nafian, meaning, O God, send beneficial rain (p. 77). Another narration from the Messenger is that whenever rain falls upon a people, it is certainly out of mercy, and whenever drought occurs, it is certainly out of anger (p. 78). There is again a report concerning the supplication for rain, and also that Imam Ali, when rain fell, would remove his garment and say: It has only recently come from the Throne (p. 79). This is similar to the very first report. The underlying notion seems to be that the rain emerges from a sea beneath the Throne, or that since God is in the heavens and rain also comes from there, its covenant with its Lord is near.

In another report, Aisha says that she heard the Messenger say that when the sky forms a “bahriyya” but then becomes “shum,” meaning it becomes ominous, that year will have abundant rainfall (p. 81). This refers to “matar al-su’,” the bad rain that turns into flooding.

Abu Hurayrah narrated that the Messenger said: If My servants obey Me, I will send down rain during the night and make their daytime bright with sunshine, and they will not hear the sound of thunder (p. 81).

In the forty-seventh report of the book, we encounter a case that refers to the nature and formation of clouds. It is a narration from Khalid ibn Yazid, the only Umayyad-era figure known for scholarly pursuits. He was in the presence of Abd al-Malik and said: Some clouds come from the sky and some arise from clouds that rise from the sea, and thunder and lightning sweeten them, “fa yu‘dhibuhu.” That which rises from the sea is not useful for plants, but that which comes from the water of the sky is suitable for vegetation. He then said: It is possible to make seawater sweet. He then asked for some water to be brought and demonstrated what could be done to sweeten it (p. 85).

There is also a report from the Mi‘raj stating that the Prophet saw thunder, lightning, and bolts of fire in the seventh heaven. He also saw people whose insides were visible from the outside. The Prophet asked about them and was told: These are the usurers. (p. 86). The connection between usury and lack of rainfall appears in other narrations as well. Perhaps here it indicates another form of punishment for that community. In several subsequent reports the Messenger complains that people are ungrateful and thankless regarding rain (pp. 87–88). From the Prophet’s perspective, rain was a manifestation of mercy (p. 90). Another transmitter said that when the Messenger saw a cloud, excitement would appear in his face, and this would continue until the rain fell (p. 92).

In another narration, when a great deal of thunder was heard in Medina, Gabriel asked the Prophet: Do you know what it is saying? The Prophet replied: No. Gabriel said: I asked it, “Where are you commanded to go?” It answered: To a land in Hadramawt called Baymim (p. 89).

The withholding of rain, from a religious perspective, is linked not only to usury but also to the injustice and oppression of rulers. The Prophet’s report states: If the leaders commit injustice, the heavens will withhold rain (p. 89). Anas ibn Malik said that Umar used to say: The withholding of rain is due to bad judges and oppressive rulers (p. 90). Many such reports exist. Hasan al-Basri, whose countless statements shaped the religious outlook of the late second century and the periods after, would say when he saw rain: Your provision lies in this, but through your errors and sins you deprive yourselves of it (p. 91).

Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As also said that in the heavens there are many lakes of water, but the pouring of it is like water poured from a vessel (p. 94). We know that a major part of his information was drawn from the People of the Book.

A narration from the Messenger states that he said: If God withholds water for seven years and then sends it down, a group of people will become unbelievers and will attribute it to the rising of the star Majdah (p. 97). This is a reference to the science of al-anwa’ and the Arabian belief in the heavens, stars, and their influence, which the Prophet recounts on the tongue of those people and rejects. Majdah refers to the star known as Aldebaran. On pages 99–100, under the verse “yet mankind refused except disbelief,” it is reported that the people used to say: Rain comes from the anwa’ (stars). This belongs to Arab pre-Islamic cosmological understanding regarding the explanation of rainfall. Umar also said in a report that when he sought forgiveness in order to ask for rain, he said that he sought rain from the “majadeeh al-sama’,” the shafts or channels of the heavens from which rain originates (p. 106). Regarding Majdah, attributing sustenance to the planets, and the subject of al-anwa’, one may consult the book al-Anwa’ fi Mawasim al-Arab by Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276), Hyderabad, 1378 AH. The subject of al-anwa’ is in fact the principal foundation of the astronomical outlook of pre-Islamic Arabs, and it is said that the Messenger rejected the Jahili theory of al-anwa’ (al-Anwa’, pp. 14–15).

In another report, it is said that Umar was sitting among a group of people as rain fell. A man from the Ansar began repeatedly praying that rain would continue to fall. Umar struck him with his whip, telling him to pray instead that God send beneficial rain that wealth and life can withstand (p. 99).

It is also reported from Ibn Sabit that the responsibility for rain and vegetation is entrusted to Mikail (p. 99).

Ka‘b al-Ahbar said: If hail, meaning ice, were to fall from the fourth heaven to the earth, it would destroy whatever it struck (p. 100).

The narrations continue with further reports about the supplication for rain and the various supplicatory phrases transmitted on this subject. These narrations come from the Messenger (pp. 105–106) and sometimes from others. It mattered to Abd al-Malik to ask a man such as Ruh ibn Zinba‘ what supplication he recited when the heavens withheld rain (p. 107).

There is an account of the observations of a Bedouin Arab who praised a particular type of rainfall. When asked why, he said: The seeds and grains of pasture and herbs descend from the heavens, and the rain I praised is that kind. This is the good rain (p. 108). Another person reported: We were on the road to Mecca. Rain came, and we saw grains on the tents (p. 109). Perhaps what they had in mind was the idea of fertilization. In any case, these are attempts at a type of cosmology and explanation of phenomena related to rain and vegetation.

In Ibn Abi al-Dunya’s book there are ninety narrations on rain, and from the ninety-first narration, which begins on page 111, the discussion of “thunder” begins.

In the first narration concerning thunder, it is stated that someone heard the Prophet say: God creates the clouds. Then He speaks and He laughs. The speaking is thunder and the laughing is lightning (p. 111). The editor of the book has judged the hadith to be sound.

In another report from al-A‘mash it is said that the Jews asked the Messenger about the nature of thunder. The Prophet replied: It is the sound of an angel (p. 112). The editor considers its chain disconnected. Nonetheless, the idea that thunder is a terrifying celestial sound which had to be explained appears in other transmissions as well. Ibn Abbas said: Thunder is an angel who drives the clouds by striking them, just as a shepherd shouts at sheep (p. 114). Abu Hurayrah also said that thunder is an angel who torments and afflicts the clouds (p. 115). In another report, thunder is counted as a severe warning to the people of the earth (p. 116). From Shahr ibn Hawshab it is related that thunder is an angel in charge of the cloud, who guides the clouds as a camel-driver guides camels with his chanting (p. 120). In another narration, thunder is described as an angel who creates the clouds (p. 125), not one who guides them.

Here again, Ka‘b al-Ahbar appears. Ibn Abbas said: We were travelling with Umar, and Ka‘b was with us. Thunder, lightning, and cold struck us. Ka‘b said: Whoever says “Subhana man sabbah al-ra‘da bi-hamdihi wal-mala’ikatu bi-khiyfatihi” will be safe from this thunder. We said it and were unharmed. Then we saw Umar suffering from the cold and with a runny nose. We told him what Ka‘b had said, and Umar complained that they had not informed him so that he could say it (p. 121).

Another report, whose form and structure are repeated in other places, states that the Jews came to the Messenger and asked about the nature of thunder. The Prophet said: It is an angel of the angels of God in charge of the clouds, who has rods of fire that he sends wherever he is commanded. They asked: Then what is this sound? The Prophet said: It is he being driven and compelled when he wishes to send it to the place he has been commanded. The Jews said: You have spoken the truth (pp. 122–123). It is feared that the original story of torment and its accompanying sound comes from Jewish sources. These reports appear in various Sunni collections such as Tirmidhi, Musnad Ahmad, Sunan al-Kubra of al-Bayhaqi, and others.

In another report, it is said that beneath the Throne there are seas of fire from which the lightning bolts arise (p. 126). This report is transmitted from a Follower named Abu Imran al-Juni and is not attributed to the Messenger.

At narration 120, the discussion of thunder concludes, and the discussion of lightning begins. The first report is a question by Ibn Abbas to “Amir”: What is the sky, and what are lightning and thunderbolts? He replied: The sky is restrained water, lightning is the glimmer of water, and thunderbolts are rods with which the clouds are tormented (p. 129).

Makharīq refers to a type of tightly woven cloth with which children are struck for the purpose of discipline. In a narration preserved in Lisan al-Arab under the word makharīq, and likewise in this very book of Ibn Abi al-Dunya (p. 10), it is reported that Imam Ali said: Lightning is the makharīq of the angels, meaning the instrument with which they discipline.

In the Qur’an it is also stated that God shows you lightning “for fear and for hope,” both fear and enticement at once, naturally for the purpose of sending rain.

Ibn Abbas said: Lightning is an angel who is seen (p. 131). In another narration explicitly attributed to Ka‘b al-Ahbar it is said: “Thunder is an angel who torments the clouds just as a shepherd gathers camels, and lightning aids that angel.”

There are only eight reports concerning lightning, and from report 128 the author proceeds to discuss wind.

The first narration about wind is: Do not revile the wind. Ask God that its good reach you and that you be protected from its harm (p. 133). Ibn Abbas has a similar statement, saying: Do not revile the wind, for sometimes it is punishment and sometimes it is mercy (p. 148). Indeed, the wind that was under the control of Solomon, “and for Solomon the stormy wind, running by his command” (Qur’an 21:81), must have been a manifestation of mercy. Other types of wind are also mentioned from this perspective, meaning that four categories of winds are mercy, and four are punishment. The munshirat, mubashshirāt, mursalāt and rikhā’ are winds of mercy. The ‘āsif and qāsif (both maritime winds), and the ‘aqīm and sarsar (on land) are manifestations of punishment (p. 162).

The conception of wind as a form of punishment for rebellious nations of the past — “that very thing you sought to hasten, a wind containing painful punishment” — in addition to what storms empirically cause among people, provides grounds for a negative view of wind. Thus here, too, there is a supplication transmitted from the Messenger for protection from the harm of wind: “O God, I seek refuge in You from the evil of what the wind brings” (p. 135). A supplication from Imam Ali for the time when wind arises is also narrated (pp. 161–162).

Aisha states that when wind blew, the complexion of the Messenger would change (p. 136; see also p. 159: he feared that some punishment might have come upon his community). Perhaps this means that he became worried. In the Qur’an, the phrase “a wind containing bitter cold” is mentioned, referring to a wind with a particular freezing sting (p. 157).

In another report it is said that when there was wind he would go to the mosque until the wind subsided, just as when there was a lunar or solar eclipse he would pray until it passed (p. 137). Ibn Abbas provides a description of wind as punishment and the affliction it brought upon rebellious peoples (p. 138). Of course, wind has various types and names. One type known as saba’, as transmitted from the Messenger, was the cause of victory [in the Battle of the Confederates], while the dabbūr was the wind that destroyed the people of ‘Ad. The south wind was a wind of Paradise (p. 140).

There is a narration reporting that the north and south winds had a conversation on the night of the Confederates about how to aid the Messenger (p. 145). Perhaps the expression “the soldiers of God” applied to wind (p. 148) refers to this, though it might also refer to its punitive aspects. The Qur’an says: “So We sent upon them a wind and forces,” which pertains to the Confederates, and it is said that this wind was the saba’ wind (p. 156).

Given that the Qur’an also mentions the ‘āsifāt and nashirāt as types of winds, and even dhāriyāt (p. 153), the implication is that wind holds a particular place in the religious imagination of Muslims. Concerning the punitive wind, the expression “a fierce wind on ill-fated days” is applied, where nahs means ominous. This stands in contrast to the winds of mercy, which include the nashirāt, mubashshirāt, mursalāt, and dhāriyāt (p. 163).

There was serious discussion about the idea that wind is a divine punishment. Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz believed that all the wicked and rebellious nations of the past were destroyed by wind (p. 164). This shows the importance of the punitive aspect of wind in the Muslim mind. A woman who survived from the people of ‘Ad, when asked what the worst punishment of God she had witnessed was, replied: The camel that was suspended between heaven and earth because of the wind (pp. 164–165).

Regarding the naming of the north, south, dabbūr, and saba’ winds, Isra’il ibn Musa al-Basri said that the meaning is north, south, the back (dabbūr), and the face of the Ka‘bah (saba’) (p. 145; see also p. 156). Ibn Abbas also gives another interpretation of these four winds, which is more astronomical. The north wind is between Capricorn and the west of the sun. The south wind is between the rising of the sun and Canopus. The saba’ wind is between the rising of the sun and Capricorn, and the dabbūr wind is between the setting of the sun and Canopus (p. 147).

From another perspective in wind lore, in a narration from Abdullah ibn Qays ibn ‘Abbād, it is said that his father stated: The north wind is the salt of the earth, and if it were absent, the earth would not produce vegetation (p. 155). Other interpretations have also been given (p. 155), along with another account listing more winds and their names (p. 163). The most prominent feature in these descriptions concerns the geographical direction of the wind.

The Qur’an also draws attention to the point that “We send the winds as fertilizing agents,” and that wind is for fertilization and contains benefits for people. But whether the fertilization here refers to clouds or to trees — as Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud transmitted — the intended meaning is clouds (p. 141). In other narrations concerning the fertilizing nature of wind, the reference is also to the fertilization of clouds (p. 152), although tree fertilization is also mentioned (p. 152).

Concerning the north wind, it is said that it passes through Paradise and receives a breeze from it, and its coldness comes from there (p. 140).

Ka‘b al-Ahbar said that if God were to restrain the wind for three days, the air between heaven and earth would be filled with stench (p. 142). Astonishingly, this same statement, with different wording, is attributed to the Messenger as well (p. 149). This phenomenon of a statement being attributed both to Ka‘b al-Ahbar and also to the Messenger occurs in other cases.

Another expression regarding the aqīm (barren) wind is that al-Dahhak, a well-known Follower, said that it is the wind that produces no fertilization (p. 144). Ka‘b al-Ahbar also said that the inhabitant of the second earth, “al-ard al-thaniyya,” is the barren wind. This is the very wind that God commanded to open the gates and destroy the people of ‘Ad (p. 156). But naturally, the barren wind is so called because it produces no fertilization, just as a barren man produces no child (p. 157). A narration from Abu Falaj al-Anmari states that in Hims it was such that when the Muslims conquered the city, the first thing that drew their attention was the winds of that region. When the wind came from the east and the clouds came from Syria, no rainfall followed. But if the wind came from the west and there were clouds in the sky, rain would certainly fall (p. 167).

The last narration of the book is similar to the first: When the sky became rainy, the Prophet would act in such a way that the rain would touch his body, and he would say: It has only recently come from its Lord (p. 167).

I am aware that this discussion does not lead us to any definitive conclusion, but it gives us a general sense of what, in this context, is the presentation of a natural cosmological framework by the Akhbari traditionists. The discourse and dominant style of this group, whose scientific and intellectual system formed the common vernacular worldview of society, aside from being Akhbari and Hadith-based, is entirely different in content from the works of the philosophers. Most of the content resembles multi-disciplinary compilations and works of “the wonders of creation.” For this group, even the geography of cities is expressed in this same literary and cosmological idiom, and as I wrote in the report concerning plague, the same applies to certain sensitive medical phenomena.

It would be unfair not to mention here that fifty years ago the late engineer Bazargan, during the period he spent in prison in the years 1964–1965, conducted a study on wind and rain in the Qur’an and compared Qur’anic data with new scientific theories. This outlook, arising from a scientific reading of the Qur’an, is a new model and should not be associated with the trend described above.

1. Source