Chapter Twenty-One: That the Soul Does Not Die with the Death of the Body

If they were rational, the marks of rational beings would appear from them; but they do not, and so they are not.

If they were rational, they would fall under religious custom (sunnah) and revealed law (sharīʻah); but they do not, and so they are not.

As for the testimonies of the Holy Scriptures on this thesis, they are the word of Dāwūd: « Be not like the horse and the mule, which have no wisdom » (1); and his word also: « The man who does not discern his own glory resembles the beast in his conditions » (2).

The Twenty-First Chapter

On the fact that the soul does not die at the death of the body

Let us set before this inquiry a preface befitting its subject, and say: know that the verification of this topic has a better claim upon us than the rest of the inquiries, for it is what sets straight the sayings of the prophets, the learned, the saints and the righteous, and of the masters of ascetic disciplines (riyāḍāt), of vigils, of solitary retreats, of fasts and of unremitting prayers — and, more abundantly still (3), the incarnation of our Lord the Lord Yasūʻ al-Masīḥ; for those who renounce this base life are few and those who desire it are many, and the knowing are few and the ignorant are many. [44] And were there no other precious station beyond the one we are now in, the virtuous souls would not (4) yearn toward it. For this reason we are bound to apply ourselves closely to establishing the demonstration of this exposition:

If corruption held true of it (1), then that would be either on account of the existence of a corrupter or on account of the ceasing of its cause. The first is void, for if the corrupter existed together with the soul's existence, it would have annihilated it from the moment of its existence; and if it did not exist and then came to exist, then it cannot but be either a body or an accident (ʻaraḍ) (2) — and how can a base body corrupt it, or an accident which has no subsistence in its own essence? And if the corrupter is not a body, then it must be equal in nature to the soul, and for that very reason it cannot corrupt it (3). And the second is impossible, because the cause that makes it is the Creator, exalted be He, and He is eternal without beginning and everlasting without end, of whom no transmutation or alteration can be conceived (4).

We say: we have already shown that the soul is neither a body nor an accident (5), and whatever has these characters is neither near to bodies nor far from them, neither inside them nor outside them. [45] And it has likewise been established that the body is the instrument of the soul, and from the corruption of the instrument the corruption of its craftsman does not follow. From this it is known that corruption does not find its way into the substance of the soul through the corruption of its instrument.

The soul is living, rational and knowing, and has the power to govern the body; and if this one had these characters, it would be the cause of life for it, and that is void and impossible.

If the soul died at the death of the body, it would have to weaken at its weakening; but it does not, and so it does not. This is known from four aspects. The first: that ascetic discipline weakens the body (1) and strengthens the soul. The second: that keeping far from foods, drinks and indulgence darkens (2) the body and illumines the soul. The third: that the senses of the body are suspended in sleep and their acts cease, while the soul (3) is awake and apprehends obscure matters in dreaming, in vision, in unveiling and the like. The fourth: that after the fortieth year the body takes the side of decrease and the soul the side of increase. And since the soul grows strong [46] through the weakening of the body, as the exposition plainly shows, its endurance (4) after the body's death follows.

Death is not the corruption of the parts of the body, for they remain in it after its death; rather death is the extinction of the innate heat (al-ḥarārah al-gharīzīyah), which is an accident accruing to the body when the temperament (mizāj) it has attained is balanced. And it is known that the accident is weaker than the body by which it subsists, and it is known that the body is weaker than the soul. The demonstration of this rests on four proofs. The first proof: that the body stands in need, in its existence, of a substrate (5) in which to inhere, and the soul is not so. The second proof: that the body is composite and so stands in need of its parts, and the soul does not have this character. The third proof: that the body is acted upon by the soul more than the reverse. The fourth proof: that after death there are found in the body its corporeal and accidental kinds, and they have no power to preserve it from corruption, while the soul (6) alone has power to do so. And since the accident is weaker than the body, and the body weaker than the soul, and death comes about through the ceasing of the accident [47] and not of the body, which is weaker than the soul, how can the intellect conceive (1) that the soul dies at the death of the body? No man of sound mind says this. It is therefore enduring after the death of the body, which is what was sought.

The soul does not fall ill (2) at the illness of the body, and likewise it does not die at its death. That it does not fall ill at the body's illness is known (3) from the crisis that arises between nature and disease, as is settled in the art of medicine. And this nature is either the temperament of the body or the rational soul. The first is impossible, for how should the sick man, weak and enfeebled in strength, have the power to fight the disease? So the statement holds true that the soul is what (4) fights the disease and is not itself sick; and it is known that were it sick it would not be able to fight. And since the soul is what fights the severity of the disease, illness does not hold true of it, and for that reason death is precluded in its regard.

We say: if the soul did not endure after the death of the body, man would have to be more contemptible in his pleasure and his life than the rest of the animals, since he is set apart from them by the intellect alone. And the thoughts of this intellect are either about what has passed, or [48] about what is present, or about what is to come. As for what has passed: if it was evil, he is filled with regret (5); and if it was good, he is downcast at its being gone. And so likewise with the present: if it is evil, he is downcast at enduring it (1); and if it is good, the pain of parting from it overtakes him, because he hopes for something greater than what he is in. And thought about what is to come overtakes him in the same way, out of fear of meeting the contrary of what he aims to attain. And since the rest of the animals lack the intellect here mentioned, they are stripped of its promptings, which have been mentioned in the case of man. By these indications we know that if man had no other governance than this one, a governance proper to his soul after the death of the body, he would have to be viler and more contemptible than the rest of the mute animals, and that is impossible; and since he is greater and nobler than they, the endurance of his soul after the death of his body follows.

We say: man's existence after his non-existence is either for a benefit that returns upon him, or for a harm that reaches him, or for the denial of both sides. The second division [49] is impossible, for the Creator, exalted be He, is universal in overflowing and bestowal; how then could it be conceived that He creates forms so that harm may befall them by His first intention? No man of sound mind says this. And the third division is impossible, because He, exalted be He, brings nothing (2) into existence save for a benefit, and creates no matter in vain. Therefore the first division holds true. And since man has in this world no real and lasting felicity unmixed with turbidities, the truth is determined (3), namely immortality in the spiritual world and a perpetuity that does not pass away (4).

All the intellects of mankind bear witness that in the measure that a man is able to acquire the virtues and to reject the vices, his soul is perfected and rises high; and whenever the matter is the reverse, it sinks to the lowest of the low. And they hold the second class base, and they magnify the first class and seek help and support through his prayers, and aspire to devotion toward him, to enter under obedience to him and to act by what pleases him and what he wills. And if man had no other station than (1) this one that falls under sense — a station in that upper, luminous world after his parting from this sensible body (2) — then all the intellects of mankind would not [50] bear witness for him to this lofty rank and to that station brought near, in closest approach, to the uttermost end in the highest assembly. And this thesis all the intellects of rational beings, the ignorant and the learned alike, agree in confirming and verifying. Therefore the soul does not die at the death of the body, which is what was sought.

As for the testimonies of the Holy Scriptures verifying what we have said, there is His word, exalted be He, to Mūsá: « I am the God of Ibrāhīm and Isḥāq and Yaʻqūb » (3). And it is known that the bodies of those named were not in existence at the time in which these words were spoken; and had the souls been non-existent at that time, He, may He be glorified, would not have pointed to non-existence, for the non-existent is not attributed to the Existent whose existence is total. And the word of the Holy Gospel: « Fear not those who kill the body, for they are no killers of the soul » (4) — for if the soul were mortal, killing would hold true of it. And the word of our Lord to the thief: « This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise » (5) — and it is known that that man's soul was

— Notes —

[38] 1) The Book of Psalms 31:9.

[38] 2) Ps 48:13 and 21.

[38] 3) Say « khuṣūṣan » in place of « bi-l-awfar ».

[38] 4) Fallen out in the original: lammā.

[39] 1) In the original: law ṣadaqa.

[39] 2) In the original: immā jism aw ʻaraḍ.

[39] 3) In the original: fasāduhā.

[39] 4) In the original: lā yaṣduru.

[39] 5) In the third chapter.

[40] 1) Fallen out in the original: al-badan.

[40] 2) Say « yajʻalu al-badan muẓliman ».

[40] 3) Fallen out in the original: wa-al-nafs.

[40] 4) In the original: baqāʼahu.

[40] 5) Fallen out in the original: maḥall.

[40] 6) Fallen out in the original: wa-al-nafs.

[41] 1) In the original: min al-ʻaql.

[41] 2) Fallen out in the original: tamraḍ.

[41] 3) In the original: kadhālika.

[41] 4) Fallen out in the original: hiya.

[41] 5) In the original: nadam.

[42] 1) In the original: maʻnāhu.

[42] 2) In the original: shayʼ.

[42] 3) In the original: fa-taʻayyana.

[42] 4) In the original: al-ghayr fānī.

[43] 1) Fallen out in the original: ghayr.

[43] 2) In the original: min hādhā al-jasad.

[43] 3) The Book of Exodus 3:6.

[43] 4) The Gospel of Mattá 10:28.

[43] 5) The Gospel of Lūqā 23:43.