Does Islam Teach That Inanimate Objects Are Alive?

Below is a translation and paraphrasing of Dr. Sultan Al-Umayri’s book, Al-Uqud Al-Dhahabiyyah ‘ala Maqasid Al-Aqeedah Al-Wasitiyyah, 2^nd edition, vol. 1, pp. 464-470.

Issue: The Question of Entities’ Tasbih (Glorification)

A widely discussed issue is the question of the tasbih of entities, which Allah Almighty alludes to in His saying: “The seven heavens and the earth and all that is in them glorify Him.” (Surah Al-Isra, 17:44), and other similar verses.

Before we delve into the details of this issue, it is necessary to clarify that this issue is not restricted to tasbih alone, but other acts as well, including:

• Prostration: There are texts affirming that entities prostrate, as in the verse: “Do you not see that to Allah prostrates whoever is in the heavens and whoever is on the earth...” (Surah Al-Hajj, 22:18).

• Prayer (salah): It is also mentioned that entities perform salah, as indicated in His saying: “Each one knows its own way of prayer and tasbih” (Surah Al-Nur, 24:41).

• Speech and perception: These are attributed to inanimate objects. This is inferred from Allah Almighty’s words: “They said, ‘We have come to know what these books conceal’” (Surah Al-Zukhruf, 43:80), and the statement of Allah Almighty: “Their skins will bear witness against them about what they used to do” (Surah Fussilat, 41:21). Similarly, the hadith about the tasbih of food and limbs.

The attribution of speech, perception, prostration, and tasbih in relation to inanimate objects is prevalent in the Qur’an. They all belong to the same category, and the debate about the way these occur follows the same methodology. Therefore, if we were to speak about tasbih, we should understand it not merely as verbal tasbih but rather as referring to a specific form of praise appropriate to each entity’s nature.

Tasbih has been attributed to entities in scripture in two ways:

1. The General Attribution: Similar to the verse: “The seven heavens and the earth and all that is in them glorify Him” (Surah Al-Isra, 17:44) and other similar verses.

2. The Specific Attribution: This involves the specific tasbih mentioned in various texts, like thunder, mountains, and birds, as well as the tasbih of food, stones, trees, and other inanimate objects.

The Divergence of Opinions on the Meaning of Entities’ Tasbih

The opinions of the various schools have differed regarding the meaning of the tasbih of entities, centering on two main views:

1.     The First View: This is the view of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah and many others. It holds that the tasbih of entities is real and not metaphorical, meaning that all entities engage in tasbih in a manner appropriate to their nature. However, this tasbih does not necessarily involve words, letters, or sounds, as with humans. Instead, it is real tasbih approriate to the nature of entities and inanimate objects. It’s not merely that each entity’s tasbih simply symbolically signifies Allah’s greatness and power.

The Arguments of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah that Entities’ Tasbih is Real and Not Metaphorical

The scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah provided several pieces of evidence supporting their view that entities engage in real tasbih rather than merely serving as symbolic signs of tasbih:

· The First Evidence: This is derived from the apparent reading of the Qur’an. The repeated mention of tasbih in several verses and its reiteration in various contexts implies a real occurrence rather than a figurative or symbolic one, especially with there being no indication (qareenah) pointing toward the opposite conclusion.

· The Second Evidence: Allah negates our knowledge of the reality of the tasbih of entities. Allah says: “But you cannot understand their tasbih” (Surah Al-Isra, 17:44). If this tasbih were not real and literal but merely symbolic, there would be no need to emphasize that humans are unable to comprehend it. The fact that Allah made this distinction suggests their tasbih is an actual but incomprehensible form of praise.

· The Third Evidence: Allah Almighty caused some inanimate objects to make tasbih of Him specifically with David (peace be upon him), as indicated in His statement: “We subjected the mountains as well as the birds to make tasbih along with David. ” [Al-Anbiya, 79]. Had the tasbih of the mountains been by their mere existence and state alone—merely signifying Allah’s grandeur rather than actual tasbih—then this would not be attributed uniquely to David (peace be upon him), which implies that this tasbih was real, not figurative.

· The Fourth Evidence: The Prophet (ﷺ) conveyed information about the meaning of the tasbih in which inanimate objects perform. Ibn ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with him) reported that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Indeed, when the Prophet Noah (peace be upon him) was in his final moments, he advised his son: ‘I command you with two things, and I forbid you from two things. I command you with “Lā ilāha illā Allāh” (There is no deity except Allah). For indeed, if the seven heavens and the seven earths were placed on one side of a scale and “Lā ilāha illā Allāh” were placed on the other, “Lā ilāha illā Allāh” would outweigh them. And if the seven heavens and the seven earths were a closed ring, it would break them apart. And I command you with “Subḥān Allāh wa bi-ḥamdih” (Glory be to Allah, and all praise is due to Him), for it is the Salah of everything.’”[1] The phrase “the Salah of everything” is understood as tasbih of everything since, in scripture, Salah can be used to refer to tasbih.

This hadith demonstrates that the tasbih ascribed to inanimate objects is not merely attributed due to their subjection to Allah’s power and will, as some might claim. Rather, it is indeed a real tasbih that aligns with their unique capacities and essential qualities. The tasbih does not necessarily have to be in spoken form, like human speech. Instead, it originates from them in a way that suits their nature and reality.

The Second View: This is held by many scholars of kalam from among the Mu’tazilites, Ash’aris, and others such as Ibn Hazm. They believe that the tasbih attributed to inanimate objects and entities is not literal but metaphorical, representing a state of subjugation to the divine will. In their view, the tasbih here does not represent speech or action but rather signifies a state of submission, akin to saying that something reflects Allah’s glory through its existence without it actively engaging in verbal tasbih. They differed when it comes to specifying the metaphorical meaning entailed by the tasbih of inanimate objects, with the two main opinions being:

1.     The First Meaning: The existence of these entities serves as evidence of Allah’s glory, power, and transcendence from all deficiencies, among which is tasbih.

2.     The Second Meaning: The status of these entities prompts the introspective person to look at them and say, “Subḥān Allah,” thereby ascribing tasbih to them, as they were the catalysts for prompting the tasbih.

Al-Qadi Abd al-Jabbar said:

قد بيّنا أن الجمادات إذا كانت لا تقبل التسبيح في الحقيقة، فالواجب إذا وُصفت أنها تسبّح أن يُحمل ذلك على أنها تدلّ على تنزيهه تعالى، فمن حيث حلت محل من يظهر ذلك بقوله يعني: من هذه الجهة أصبحت في محل من يسبّح بقوله، وهو البشر، فهذا هو المراد بقوله: يُسَبِّحُ لِلَّهِ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ

“We have clarified that if inanimate objects are inherently incapable of true tasbih, then when they are described as making tasbih, it must be understood that they signify the transcendence of Allah, exalted be He. This is because they occupy the place of those who express this tasbih verbally—that is, in this sense, they stand in for those who make tasbih of Allah through speech, such as human beings. This is the intended meaning of His statement: “Whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth make tasbih of Allah.”

Al-Razi says:

اعلم أن الحي المكلف يسبح لله بوجهين: الأول: بالقول، كقوله باللسان: سبحان الله. والثاني: بدلالة أحواله على توحيد الله وتقديسه وعزته. فأما الذي لا يكون مكلفاً مثل البهائم، ومن لا يكون حياً مثل الجمادات، فهي إنما تسبح لله تعالى بالطريق الثاني، أي بلسان حالها؛ لأن التسبيح بالطريق الأول لا يحصل إلا مع الفهم والعلم والإدراك والنطق، وكل ذلك في الجمادات محال، فلم يبق بين حصول التسبيح في حقه – يعني في حق الجمادات – إلا بالطريق الثاني

اعلم أنا لو جوزنا في الجمادات أن يكون عالماً متكلماً لعجزنا على الاستدلال بكونه تعالى عالماً قادراً على كونه حياً، وحينئذٍ يفسد علينا أن العلم بكونه حياً، وذلك كفر، فإنه يقال: إذا جاز في الجمادات أن تكون علامة على أنه تعالى قادراً متكلماً كغيره، من أنها ليست أحياء – فيحتمل أن يقال في غيره من كون الشيء عالماً قادراً متكلماً كغيره، وذلك جهل وكفر

“Know that the living, accountable being who glorifies in two ways. The first is that he glorifies with his tongue, saying: ‘Subḥān Allah.’ The second is that his state indicates the evidence of Allah’s oneness, sanctity, and glory. As for those who are not living and accountable, such as animals and inanimate objects, they glorify Allah Almighty in the second way. This is because tasbih, in the first way, cannot occur except with understanding, knowledge, perception, and the ability to speak. All of this is impossible when it comes to inanimate objects. Thus, the tasbih stemming from inanimate objects could only be actualized in the second way.

Know that if we were to permit the notion that inanimate objects could possess knowledge and speech, we would be unable to use them as proof of Allah’s attributes of knowledge and power, which affirm His being alive. This would undermine our understanding of His living nature, which would be tantamount to kufr. For if one were to argue that inanimate objects could serve as indicators of His power and speech while they themselves are not living beings, then it could likewise be said of other beings—that they possess knowledge, power, and speech without being alive. Such a stance is ignorance and kufr.”[2]

This analysis is important in the matter of the tasbih of entities, as it raises several foundational principles related to this issue that must be addressed.

Al-Razi’s statement includes two fundamental principles upon which his idea of the tasbih of entities is based.

The first principle is that tasbih is a kind of awareness and perception. Perception requires knowledge and understanding. Knowledge and understanding cannot be actualized without life. Thus, any entity not ascribed with life cannot be attributed with tasbih.

The second principle is that tasbih is not established without understanding, perception, and cognition. Thus, if we assume that Allah the Exalted can grant inanimate objects understanding and cognition, they could glorify Him with comprehension and awareness. However, if they lack that understanding, they only signify tasbih through their existence and not conscious praise.”

They argue for this principle by articulating it differently, saying that tasbih requires the presence of a structure capable of life.

Relying on this principle in interpreting the tasbih of entities is incorrect for several reasons:

The first reason: There is no evidence to say that tasbih cannot actualize without knowledge, understanding, and life. It may be that tasbih in some creations is due to the nature of their creation, with which Allah created them. Therefore, their tasbih is not a result of knowledge and choice. So what prevents us from saying that Allah has endowed some creations with the ability to make tasbih without necessarily being attributed with qualities of known living animals?

If they say: “Our evidence is that our inductive examination of reality proves that only the living make tasbih, so when that is the case, it proves to us the correctness of our stance.”

However, this type of induction is ineffective in establishing the argument, as it is incomplete and involves a conflation of fundamentally different realities. It applies the ruling for living entities to non-living entities.

The second reason: It may be said that even if we concede that tasbih requires awareness, there is no evidence that awareness must necessarily be tied to life. Inanimate objects might possess a form of awareness that aligns with their nature, enabling them to perform tasbih in a way that differs from the awareness found in living beings.

Thus, living entities must indeed possess life when they perform tasbih, but there is no proof that life is necessary for tasbih to be realized by inanimate objects.

The third reason: It may be said that even if we concede that awareness must involve life, what prevents the possibility that inanimate objects have a form of life specific to them that is distinct from the life of living entities? This would be a type of life that corresponds to their nature and essence, through which awareness is realized.

The fourth reason: The attribution of tasbih and prostration to inanimate objects has been affirmed by numerous legal texts in various contexts. There is no opposing evidence to contradict this, except for an incomplete inductive analysis. Therefore, it is not appropriate to abandon the apparent meanings of the verses based on a deficient argument.

The fifth issue: Al-Razi contradicts himself in his commentary, as he establishes this statement in one place in his tafsir, and then in another place, he rules against what he had previously established, saying that there is no definitive proof for this. He says in the context of refuting the statement of the Mu’tazilah:

واعلم أن مدار هذا القول – قول المعتزلة – على أن بنية الجبل لا تقبل الحياة، وهذا ممنوع، أي: لا دليل عليه

“And know that the foundation of this argument—the argument of the Mu’tazilites—rests on the claim that the structure of a mountain cannot sustain life. However, this is rejected, as no evidence supports it.”[3]

Elsewhere, he said the contrary by saying that it must be the case that such inanimate objects cannot be alive.

Second Principle: If it were true that inanimate objects could possess attributes of perception, such as knowledge and speech, our argument that Allah is characterized by life would be invalidated. This is because—as Al-Razi states—we deduced that Allah is living based on His being knowledgeable and speaking, and knowledge and speech cannot exist except alongside life. Therefore, if we claim that inanimate objects, which are not alive, possess the attributes of knowledge and speech, this would undermine our argument. This would lead to a significant problem in reasoning about the divine attribute of life.

Relying on this principle to make ta’wil of the tasbih of entities is incorrect for several reasons:

The first reason: Affirming tasbih and prostration for inanimate objects does not necessarily mean ascribing life to them, as previously shown. For this reason, the Most High said: “But you do not understand their tasbih” (Qur’an, 17:44); so the tasbih of entities is not of the same essence as human tasbih.

The second reason: Even if we concede that tasbih necessitates life, the evidence for the affirmation of life for Allah is not confined to that single proof. Rather, there are additional pieces of evidence. We have the evidence of negation and affirmation, the proof of the Bestower of Perfection, and several rational arguments that have already been explained.

The Third Principle: This principle differs from the previous ones I mentioned. Ibn Hazm referred to it in his statement:

أما تسيبح كل شَيْء فالتسبيح عندنَا إِنَّمَا هُوَ قَول سُبْحَانَ الله وَبِحَمْدِهِ وبالضرورة نعلم أَن الْحِجَارَة والخشب والهوام والحشرات والألوان لَا تَقول سُبْحَانَ الله بِالسِّين والباءوالحاء وَالْألف وَالنُّون وَاللَّام وَالْهَاء هَذَا مَا لَا يشك فِيهِ من لَهُ مسكة عقل فإ لَا شكّ فِي هَذَا فباليقين علمنَا أَن التَّسْبِيح الَّذِي ذكره الله تَعَالَى هُوَ حق وَهُوَ معنى غير تسبيحنا نَحن بِلَا شكّ فَإذْ لَا شكّ فِي هَذَا فَإِن التَّسْبِيح فِي أصل اللُّغَة وَهُوَ تَنْزِيه الله تَعَالَى عَن السوء فَإذْ قد صَحَّ هَذَا فَإِن كل شَيْء فِي الْعَالم بِلَا شكّ منزه لله تَعَالَى عَن السوء الَّذِي هُوَ صفة الْحُدُوث وَلَيْسَ فِي العاعلم شَيْء إِلَّا وَهُوَ دَال بِمَا فِيهِ من دَلَائِل الصَّنْعَة واقتضائه صانعًا لَا يشبه شَيْئا مِمَّا خلق على أَن الله تَعَالَى منزه عَن كل سوء وَنقص وَهَذَا هُوَ الَّذِي لَا يفهمهُ وَلَا يفقهه كثير من النَّاس

“As for the tasbih of everything, according to us, tasbih is the verbal declaration: “Subhan Allah wa bi-hamdihi” (Glory be to Allah and praise be to Him). It is evident by necessity that stones, wood, insects, and colors do not utter “Subhan Allah” using the letters “sin,” “ba,” “ha,” “alif,” “nun,” “lam,” and “ha.” No one with even a shred of intellect doubts this. Hence, there is no doubt about this. With certainty, we know that the tasbih mentioned by Allah Almighty is real, but it is of a meaning other than our verbal tasbih—without a doubt. Since there is no doubt about this, it follows that tasbih, in its original linguistic sense, means to declare Allah’s transcendence above any imperfection.

Since this is affirmed, then everything in the world undoubtedly declares Allah’s transcendence from imperfection, which is the attribute of createdness. There is nothing in the world except that it serves as evidence, through the signs of craftsmanship it bears, for the existence of a Creator who resembles nothing He has created. This signifies that Allah Almighty is exalted above all deficiencies and shortcomings. However, this is something that many people neither understand nor comprehend.”[4]

The core of this principle is that the tasbih of Allah refers to saying: “Subḥān Allāh (Glory be to Allah),” purifying Him from all faults, evils, and defects. For this reason, Ibn Hazm mentioned that it consists of letters and sounds: “sīn,” “bā,” “ḥā,” “nūn,” “alif,” “lām,” “hā.” Since inanimate objects do not utter these specific letters, this would entail that they do not literally make tasbih.

This analysis reveals traces of the Dhahirism that Ibn Hazm followed. This affected his position regarding tasbih in that he restricted it to a particular type of speech, which he understood to be made up of sounds and letters.

This assertion contradicts what is known in the Arabic language. Lexicographers have defined the essence of tasbih as pertaining to exaltation and reverence, not merely to the phrase “Subhan Allah.” Additionally, the religious texts indicate that we do not comprehend the tasbih of other beings. If their tasbih were simply an indication of Allah’s greatness, it would have been evident to us.[5]

---

[1] Reported by Ahmad (3583) and al-Bukhari in al-Adab al-Mufrad (548) and authenticated by al-Albani.

[2] Al-Tafsir al-Kabir by Al-Razi (20/347).

[3] Al-Tafsir al-Kabir by Al-Razi (22/168).

[4] Al-Fasl fi al-Milal wal-Ahwa' wal-Nihal by Ibn Hazm (1/72).

[5] The agreement between Ibn Hazm’s view and that of some Mutakallimun demonstrates that alignment in opinions does not necessarily imply alignment in general principles and foundational concepts. This is a significant branch of knowledge related to creed. It may be termed “the affirmed and the divergent” (al-muttafiq wal-muftariq), meaning that while there is agreement on conclusions, there is divergence in principles and generalities. Numerous statements on the topics of Iman, divine attributes, predestination, and other areas align in their conclusions but differ in their foundational principles.