Free will, determinism and predestination — Islam

What the specification asks for

Paper 1, Section 1, 1.4 (Islam). Assessed on AO1 (knowledge and understanding) and AO2 (analysis and evaluation), weighted equally. Incandio is aligned to this specification. It is not published by, endorsed by or affiliated with Pearson, and it reproduces none of Pearson's indicative content — the point numbers are given so you can check every unit against your own copy.

1 · Understand it

Before a Muslim tells you what they are doing tomorrow, they will usually say insha'Allah — if God wills. Then they make the plan anyway. That small habit sits exactly on top of the hardest problem in this unit: if nothing happens outside God's will, in what sense was tomorrow ever yours to plan? Islam has been arguing about that for fourteen centuries and has refused, all that time, to give up either half of it.

What it means

The first half is al-Qadr — God's decree. Nothing happens outside his knowledge or his will, and all that will happen is described as recorded on al-Lawh al-Mahfuz, the Preserved Tablet. In Sunni Islam this is one of the six articles of faith, so it is not an optional flourish for the theologically inclined.

The second half is full human accountability. Every person will answer for their own deeds — and answering for a deed presupposes that the deed was theirs. Without that, the Day of Judgement is not justice, and God is described throughout the Qur'an as just. So the second half is not a concession to human feeling; it is required by an attribute of God.

Those two look incompatible, and the honest position is that the tradition has not resolved them. There were vigorous historical schools on both sides. The mainstream settled instead on affirming both and declining to explain the mechanism — which is a real intellectual position rather than an evasion, and saying so is a stronger answer than pretending to a tidy synthesis.

Two more words matter. Tawakkul is trust in God, and the tradition pairs it with effort rather than with sitting still. And insha'Allah is al-Qadr in daily speech: said before a plan, not instead of one.

Why believers hold it

Both claims come from the same place, which is why neither can simply be dropped. If God is not sovereign over everything, he is not the God that oneness describes — there would be a corner of reality he does not hold. So the decree follows from the central doctrine rather than being bolted onto it.

But if human beings are not genuinely free, then judgement is a punishment for something you could not have avoided, and God is repeatedly described as just. So accountability follows from a divine attribute too. Two doctrines, both derived from what God is, pointing in different directions.

Faced with that, the tradition did something worth respecting: it declined to buy a solution by weakening one side. The schools that tried — in either direction — ended up with either a God who is not sovereign or a judgement that is not just, and neither was acceptable. Holding an unresolved tension is what an intellectually honest tradition does when both halves are load-bearing.

Where it comes from

• The Qur'an — Qur'an 3:185 (with 75:1–4) (translated)

  Every soul shall taste death ... and only then will you be paid your full recompense.

  Death is certain and judgement follows it. Akhirah — the afterlife — with Barzakh, the Day of Judgement, and Jannah or Jahannam.

  What it is doing here: This is why accountability cannot be surrendered — a full recompense is paid to every soul, and there is no way to make that just unless the deeds were genuinely the person's own.

• The Qur'an — the Opening — Qur'an 1 (Surah Al-Fatihah) (translated)

  Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, the Compassionate, the Merciful.

  The chapter recited in every unit of salah. It names God as Creator, as merciful and as judge, and asks for guidance.

  What it is doing here: Names God as Lord of all the worlds in the prayer said many times a day, which is the sovereignty half of the tension stated in ordinary devotional language rather than in theology.

• Hadith — Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Faith (translated)

  None of you truly believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.

  Faith is measured by how one treats others. One of the most widely cited hadith on social ethics.

  What it is doing here: Useful for the practical end: a duty owed to a neighbour only makes sense for someone whose conduct is theirs to change, so ordinary moral teaching assumes the freedom the decree seems to threaten.

Where it bites

It shows up in speech. Insha'Allah before any plan is al-Qadr in daily use, and it is emphatically not fatalism — the Muslim says it and then books the ticket. That one habit shows the doctrine working as a qualification on human confidence rather than as a substitute for human effort.

It also shapes the response to misfortune. Illness or loss is accepted as falling within the decree, and seeking treatment is a religious duty at the same time. Acceptance and action are not alternatives here, which is exactly what tawakkul means: trust that is paired with effort, not with passivity.

What people get wrong

People think: Islam is fatalistic — Muslims believe everything is fixed so nothing they do matters.

Actually: The tradition explicitly rejects this. Accountability is one of the two halves it will not give up, and the everyday evidence is insha'Allah being said BEFORE the plan is made rather than instead of it. A learner who presents Islam as fatalistic has described a position Islam argues against.

People think: Al-Qadr is basically karma.

Actually: One is the decree of a personal God who knows and wills; the other is an impersonal law of consequence with nobody deciding anything. They answer different questions and they are not interchangeable.

People think: The Muslim position is that free will and predestination have been reconciled.

Actually: It is that both are true and the mechanism is not explained. Saying so accurately is stronger than inventing a synthesis, because the honest report is itself the interesting fact about the tradition.

What the examiner expects you to understand

• Use al-Qadr, al-Lawh al-Mahfuz, tawakkul and insha'Allah, and define them. The 2025 report pattern is that answers without the tradition's vocabulary read as generic philosophy and are capped.
• Insha'Allah is the most useful piece of evidence on this unit and almost nobody uses it — it refutes the fatalism charge from ordinary practice rather than from theory.
• For the twelve-mark question the hinge is usually whether the two beliefs can be held together. You are allowed to conclude that they cannot, provided you argue it from the tradition's own material rather than from impatience with it.
• An argument about determinism with no Islamic content earns very little however good the philosophy is — the marks here are for Islamic reasoning.
• Do not manufacture a Sunni–Shi'a split on this. Both affirm al-Qadr and accountability; the historical argument was between schools, and it is largely closed.

2 · Grade 9 Notes

Core belief / issue

Islam holds two things together that look incompatible: al-Qadr, Allah's decree, under which nothing happens outside his will and knowledge; and full human accountability, without which the Day of Judgement would be unjust. Muslim theologians have argued about how they fit for fourteen centuries and have never given up either. A learner who presents Islam as fatalistic has described a position the tradition rejects.

Key terminology

Incandio's mark schemes credit the religion's own vocabulary; spelling variants are accepted, a vague paraphrase is not.

Al-Qadr (also Qadar, al-Qadar)

Allah's decree and predestination — one of the six articles of faith in Sunni Islam.

Al-Lawh al-Mahfuz

The Preserved Tablet, on which all that will happen is recorded.

Insha'Allah

'If Allah wills' — said before any statement of future intention, and a daily expression of al-Qadr.

Accountability

The teaching that every person will answer for their own deeds, which presupposes that the deeds were theirs.

Tawakkul

Trust in Allah — which the tradition pairs with effort, not with passivity.

What Islam teaches

• shared — Allah knows everything that will happen, and nothing occurs outside his will. Al-Qadr is an article of faith.
• shared — Human beings are genuinely responsible for their choices and will be judged on them.
• shared — These two are held together rather than resolved into one another. The tradition treats the tension as something to live with rather than a contradiction to fix.
• shared — Trust in Allah does not replace effort. The recorded instruction is to tie the camel and then trust — the effort is part of the trust, not an alternative to it.

Why it teaches this

Both claims come from the same source. If Allah is not sovereign, he is not the God tawhid describes; if human beings are not free, judgement is unjust and Allah is repeatedly described as just. Islam has not been willing to weaken either, which is why the historical schools — and there were vigorous ones on both sides — never produced a settlement, and why the mainstream position is to affirm both and decline to explain the mechanism.

Sources of authority

• The Qur'an — Qur'an 3:185 (with 75:1–4) (translated)

  Every soul shall taste death ... and only then will you be paid your full recompense.

  Death is certain and judgement follows it. Akhirah — the afterlife — with Barzakh, the Day of Judgement, and Jannah or Jahannam.

  How to use it: Because reward and punishment come after death, this life is a test rather than an end in itself — which is why Muslim answers about suffering and about the purpose of life run through akhirah.

  What it does not settle: Resurrection in Islam is BODILY. Writing about reincarnation here is the confusion the 2021 report records.

• The Qur'an — the Opening — Qur'an 1 (Surah Al-Fatihah) (translated)

  Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, the Compassionate, the Merciful.

  The chapter recited in every unit of salah. It names God as Creator, as merciful and as judge, and asks for guidance.

  How to use it: Because it is said in every prayer, its content is what a Muslim rehearses several times a day — which is how belief and practice hold together in Islam.

  What it does not settle: Shared by all Muslims, so it distinguishes no tradition from another.

• Hadith — Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Faith (translated)

  None of you truly believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.

  Faith is measured by how one treats others. One of the most widely cited hadith on social ethics.

  How to use it: It makes belief and ethics inseparable — a Muslim cannot claim faith while wronging a neighbour — which is why hadith is a source of authority alongside the Qur'an rather than an illustration of it.

  What it does not settle: Hadith authority differs between traditions, and the Qur'anists reject hadith entirely — a group the Pearson mark schemes themselves mention.

Different interpretations

• Compatibilist: Allah's knowledge is not causation, and a person doing what they want is acting freely whether or not it was known.
• Acquisition (kasb): Allah creates the act and the human being acquires it, which was the mainstream theological attempt to hold both sides.
• The apophatic reading: how they fit is beyond human understanding, and both must simply be affirmed — the position most Muslims hold in practice.

Differences within Islam

Sunni and Shi'a Islam both affirm al-Qadr and accountability. The historical schools disagreed sharply about the mechanism, and that debate is now largely closed in favour of affirming both without a mechanism.

The traditions broadly agree here. Saying so is a stronger answer than inventing a division.

Application to the issue

It shows in ordinary speech: 'insha'Allah' before any plan is al-Qadr in daily use, and it is not fatalism — a Muslim says it and then makes the plan. It also shapes response to misfortune: illness or loss is accepted as within Allah's decree, while seeking treatment is a religious duty. Accepting the decree and acting are not alternatives.

Arguments supporting

• Human beings are free, because judgement would otherwise be unjust. — Islam holds that Allah is just, and punishing someone for what they could not avoid is not just. (islam)
  Answered by: It argues from what Allah must be like to what humans must be like, which only persuades those who already accept the theology.
• Trust and effort go together, so the tradition is not fatalistic. — Tie the camel and then trust; seeking medical treatment is a duty rather than a failure of faith. (islam)
  Answered by: It shows the tradition is not fatalistic in practice without showing how the two claims fit in theory.

Arguments challenging

• If everything is written, choice is an illusion. — The Preserved Tablet records what will happen, and what is recorded cannot fail to occur. (non-religious)
  Answered by: Recording is not causing. Whether foreknowledge differs from a record of what free agents will freely do is exactly the disputed point.
• Physical causes fully explain human action. — Choices are brain events and brain events have prior causes. (non-religious)
  Answered by: Compatibilism accepts every premise and denies the conclusion: acting freely means acting from your own reasons, not being uncaused.

Secular / non-religious perspective

Hard determinists hold that the sense of choosing is produced by a brain that cannot see its own causes, so praise and blame need rethinking. Compatibilists hold that free will simply means acting on your own desires without external compulsion, in which case freedom and determinism are both true. The second is the majority philosophical view, and it dissolves the theological problem in the same move.

Examinable throughout Paper 1. Nothing here earns a mark on Paper 2.

Evaluation

The hinge: Whether knowing entails causing. Every version of the argument — theological and scientific — needs that premise, and it is almost never argued for.

Defensible conclusions

• The tradition that holds decree and accountability together is refusing a dilemma rather than failing to notice one, and refusing it is defensible because the inference from foreknowledge to control has an unargued step.
• Compatibilism dissolves the problem in both its forms, which makes it the strongest available position.
• Freedom is a matter of degree, and the practical question — is it enough to make judgement fair? — can be answered without settling the metaphysics.

Not defensible

• Presenting Islam as fatalistic; 'insha'Allah' is said before making the plan, not instead of it.
• Treating al-Qadr and human accountability as a contradiction the tradition has failed to notice.

Exam use

• Identify · 3 marks — Three beliefs about predestination, or three limits on human freedom.
• Outline · 4 marks — Two beliefs about free will, developed. Al-Qadr and accountability are the natural pair.
• Explain · 6 marks — Explain why many Muslims believe humans are responsible for their actions: accountability, the Day of Judgement, and Shaytan tempting rather than compelling.
• Evaluate · 12 marks — 'If everything is predestined there is no point in trying to live a good life.' Grant the premise and show what the tradition says still gives the effort its point — the camel is tied, then trusted.

Common mistakes

• Describing Islam as fatalistic.
• Confusing al-Qadr with karma; one is a decree by a personal God, the other an impersonal law.
• Arguing about determinism with no Islamic content, which the grid caps as generic.

“Karma is God punishing you for what you did wrong.” — Karma is a law of cause and effect, not a verdict. No one weighs the evidence and no one sentences you; the action itself conditions what follows.

Write instead: Karma is the principle that intentional action produces consequences which shape future experience. In Buddhism it turns on intention specifically. Sikh teaching holds karma alongside God's hukam and God's grace. Sikhism is the genuine middle case: karma operates, and liberation comes by God's grace rather than by accumulated merit. Saying so is a strong distinction.

“Christians believe divorce is always wrong.” — That is the Catholic position. Orthodox Christianity permits divorce in limited circumstances, and most Protestant churches permit divorce and remarriage.

Write instead: Name the tradition. 'Catholic teaching holds marriage indissoluble, so the Church annuls rather than divorces' is accurate and scores; 'Christians believe' on a divided question is not. Do not over-correct. Many claims genuinely ARE shared — the Trinity, the resurrection, the authority of the Bible — and hedging those makes an answer weaker, not more careful. (Named in the 2025 examiner report for Paper 1.)

Grade 9 insight

'Insha'Allah' is the most useful evidence on this unit and almost nobody uses it. It is al-Qadr spoken aloud dozens of times a day — and it is said BEFORE the plan is made, not instead of making it. That single linguistic habit shows the doctrine operating as a qualification on human confidence rather than as a substitute for human effort, which refutes the fatalism charge from ordinary practice rather than from theology.

Carry on through Islam

• Previous unit: 1.3 · Selfishness, greed, ignorance and sin
• Next unit: 1.5 · Ultimate reality
• Free will, determinism and predestination in the other religions: Buddhism · Christianity · Hinduism · Judaism · Sikhism
• All of Islam · Incandio Religious Studies · The 4RS1 specification