The universe and the place of human beings — Islam

What the specification asks for

Paper 1, Section 1, 1.1 (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

Imagine somebody hands you the keys to a house that belongs to their family. You can live in it, eat what is in the cupboards, and use the garden. What you cannot do is knock a wall down, because it was never yours. Islam describes the whole world that way — and once you see the question in those terms, 'should people look after the planet?' turns into a completely different question: what does somebody owe for something they were only ever lent?

What it means

Two Arabic words carry this entire specification point, and neither of them means 'nature'. The first is khalifah, which means a trustee or steward — a person who holds something on the owner's behalf. The second is amanah, which means the trust itself: the thing that has been handed over, and which will have to be accounted for. Islam teaches that human beings are khalifah of the earth and that the earth is the amanah.

That claim is much stronger than 'Muslims care about the environment'. Caring about something is a feeling. Holding something in trust is a position with duties attached, and the duties do not depend on how you feel about the job. A trustee who damages what they hold has not merely been wasteful — they have broken a trust, which is a different kind of wrong altogether.

Two more words fill the picture out. Tawhid is the oneness of God: there is one maker, and therefore one owner of everything that was made. Mizan means balance — the Qur'an describes creation as made in balance, and human beings are told not to disturb it. Put those together and you get the Islamic account of the universe in one line: a world made deliberately, made in proportion, owned by its maker, and lent to the one creature that can be held answerable for it.

And that last phrase is where the point about human beings sits. Islam does not say people are distinct because they matter more than other creatures. It says they are distinct because they are morally accountable — they were offered the trust and they accepted it. Animals are described in the Qur'an as communities like human communities; cruelty to them is forbidden, and the recorded sayings of the Prophet on their treatment are extensive. What makes a human different is not being worth more. It is owing more.

Why believers hold it

The reasoning starts from tawhid, and it is worth following slowly, because it is the reasoning rather than the conclusion that top-band answers are built out of. If there is exactly one creator, then nothing in the world made itself, and nothing in the world is ownerless. And if nothing is ownerless, then nothing is anybody's absolutely — your possessions are things you hold, not things you finally own. Damaging the world is therefore not waste. It is a breach of trust.

The second step is what makes the obligation hold. Islam teaches that everyone will be questioned on the Day of Judgement, so the trust has a reckoning attached to it. This is the honest difference between the Muslim argument and a purely secular one, and it is the difference examiners are looking for. A duty owed to future generations weakens when nobody can see you and nobody will ever know. A duty owed to someone who already knows does not.

There is a third strand that most learners never reach and that separates a Grade 9 answer from a Grade 6 one. In the Qur'anic narrative, when the trust is announced, the angels object: will you place on earth one who will cause corruption and shed blood? The reply is not that the angels are mistaken about human behaviour. So the position was granted with the risk fully acknowledged — which makes Islamic trusteeship a much more interesting foundation for an environmental argument than a straightforward gift would be.

Where it comes from

• The Qur'an — Qur'an 2:30 (with 6:165) (translated)

  I will create a vicegerent on earth.

  Humans as khalifah — God's trustees on earth, accountable for how creation is treated. Paired with the concept of amanah, the trust.

  What it is doing here: This is the verse the whole idea rests on — it is where the role of trustee is announced, and where the objection to it is recorded in the same passage.

• 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: Use this to show that the duty runs outwards to other creatures and other people, not only upwards to God — it is why 'humans matter most' is the wrong reading of the trust.

• The Qur'an — Qur'an 49:13 (translated)

  We created you from a single pair ... and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another.

  Human diversity is intended by God, and its purpose is mutual knowledge. The verse also states that the most honoured are the most righteous, not the most powerful.

  What it is doing here: Useful for the human half of the point: people are described as one family deliberately made different from one another, which sets the value of a person before any question of rank arises.

Where it bites

It decides things a Muslim actually does. Israf — waste and extravagance — is condemned, so food thrown away is a religious matter and not merely a household one. The rules on slaughter are built around minimising an animal's suffering. There are rules forbidding the destruction of trees and crops even during a war, which is a striking place to find an environmental limit. And modern Muslim organisations argue from exactly this vocabulary: green mosque projects, and the Islamic Declaration on Global Climate Change, make their case out of khalifah and amanah rather than borrowing a secular one.

Naming one concrete example like that is what turns a general claim into a developed point in the exam. 'Muslims believe in caring for the earth' earns very little. 'Muslims are khalifah, so wasting food is israf and is condemned — which is why a mosque running a food-waste scheme presents it as a religious duty' earns a great deal more, because it has the belief, the reason and the practice in one movement.

What people get wrong

People think: Khalifah and Caliph are the same word, so this is about Islamic rulers.

Actually: They come from the same root and they are not the same idea. Khalifah here is the role of every human being as trustee of the earth. The Caliphs were a historical political office. An examiner report specifically records candidates going wrong on this, so it is worth defining each separately if you use either.

People think: God gave the earth to human beings to use.

Actually: A gift transfers ownership; a trust does not. Islam describes the world as held, not given. The whole force of the argument depends on that difference, because it is what makes damage a betrayal rather than a shame.

People think: Muslims look after the environment because it is sensible.

Actually: That removes the reason the tradition actually gives, and produces an answer with no religious content — which this paper marks very low. The obligation is presented as religious: it follows from who owns the world, and from the account that will be rendered for it.

What the examiner expects you to understand

• You are expected to use the tradition's own vocabulary. Khalifah, amanah, tawhid and mizan are Qur'anic terms, and the mark schemes credit them; a vague paraphrase about nature does not get the same marks.
• For knowledge marks, a belief on its own is half an answer. Say what a Muslim therefore does — that is what turns a stated belief into a developed one.
• For the twelve-mark evaluation, the marks are for a judgement you have argued for, not for a survey. Setting the religious case beside the secular case and stopping is the commonest way to lose the top band.
• The strongest available line is that removing humanity would remove the only creature capable of repairing the trust — which is a genuine argument, not a slogan, and can be used on either side.
• Do not claim Islam is indifferent to the environment, and do not invent a split between Sunni and Shi'a here. On this point the traditions broadly agree, and saying so is a stronger answer than manufacturing a division.

2 · Grade 9 Notes

Core belief / issue

Islam teaches that Allah created the universe with purpose and that human beings hold it as a trust. The two words that carry the whole unit are khalifah — trustee or steward — and amanah, the trust itself. Because the earth belongs to Allah and humanity will be judged on how it was kept, environmental care in Islam is an act of religion rather than a matter of prudence, and that is a stronger claim than 'Muslims care about nature'.

Key terminology

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

Khalifah (also khalifa, vicegerent, steward)

Humanity as Allah's trustee on earth, accountable for how creation is treated.

Amanah

The trust — what has been entrusted to humanity and must be accounted for.

Tawhid (also tawheed)

The oneness of Allah; everything created is unified under one Creator.

Fitrah

The natural state in which Allah created human beings — inclined towards good and towards recognising him.

Mizan

Balance. The Qur'an describes creation as made in balance, which humans are not to disturb.

What Islam teaches

• shared — Allah created the universe deliberately and in balance, and everything in it belongs to him rather than to anyone living in it.
• shared — Human beings are khalifah — trustees of the earth — and will be judged on how the trust was kept.
• shared — Animals are Allah's creatures with their own worth, and cruelty to them is forbidden; the Prophet's recorded sayings on the treatment of animals are extensive.
• shared — Human beings are distinct from other creatures because they are morally accountable — they alone were offered the trust and accepted it.

Why it teaches this

The reasoning runs from tawhid. If Allah is the sole creator, nothing in the world is ownerless and nothing is anyone's absolutely — so damaging the earth is not waste but a breach of trust. And because Islam holds that everyone will be questioned on the Day of Judgement, the trust has a reckoning attached to it. That is what makes the Muslim environmental argument different from a secular one: it does not weaken when nobody is watching, because someone always is.

Sources of authority

• The Qur'an — Qur'an 2:30 (with 6:165) (translated)

  I will create a vicegerent on earth.

  Humans as khalifah — God's trustees on earth, accountable for how creation is treated. Paired with the concept of amanah, the trust.

  How to use it: Trusteeship means the earth is not ours, so damaging it wrongs God and not only future generations — which reaches a conclusion secular environmentalism cannot.

  What it does not settle: Establishes responsibility, not any specific environmental policy.

• The Qur'an — Qur'an 49:13 (translated)

  We created you from a single pair ... and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another.

  Human diversity is intended by God, and its purpose is mutual knowledge. The verse also states that the most honoured are the most righteous, not the most powerful.

  How to use it: Difference is designed rather than tolerated, so racial harmony is God's plan being fulfilled rather than a compromise — that is a stronger claim and it scores better.

  What it does not settle: It does not by itself settle questions about the roles of men and women.

• 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

• Khalifah as trusteeship: the dominant reading — authority held on behalf of the owner, with an account to render.
• Khalifah as responsibility rather than rank: some scholars stress that the title describes a duty rather than a privilege, and that the angels' objection in the narrative is a warning about how humans might use it.
• Mizan as an environmental principle: the balance of creation is something humans can disturb, which gives Muslim environmentalism a Qur'anic vocabulary of its own rather than a borrowed one.

Differences within Islam

Sunni, Shi'a and Sufi Muslims agree on khalifah, amanah and the accountability that follows. Differences here are of emphasis — Sufi traditions often stress the presence of Allah in creation more strongly — rather than of doctrine.

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

Application to the issue

It shapes concrete practice: avoiding waste (israf is condemned), the rules on humane slaughter, the prohibition on damaging trees and crops even in war, and modern Muslim environmental initiatives such as green mosque projects and the Islamic Declaration on Global Climate Change. A learner who names one of these turns a general claim into a developed point.

Arguments supporting

• Human beings do have a special responsibility for the planet. — Humanity accepted the trust and will be judged on it — the duty is owed upwards, not merely sideways. (islam)
  Answered by: It grounds the duty in accountability to Allah, which is unavailable to the non-religious — though they answer that future generations are enough.
• Only humans can be held accountable, so only humans can be trustees. — Moral agency: an animal is not answerable for what it does and a person is. (shared)
  Answered by: Being the only one who can decide does not establish that the decision may be made in your own interest.

Arguments challenging

• Trusteeship still puts humanity above the rest of creation. — The trust was offered to humans, and everything else is what is held rather than a holder. (non-religious)
  Answered by: Islamic teaching is explicit that animals are communities like human communities and that cruelty is punishable, so the hierarchy carries obligations rather than licence.
• Human need must sometimes outweigh environmental cost. — Development and poverty relief carry environmental costs, and refusing them harms people now. (shared)
  Answered by: The poorest are hit hardest by environmental damage, so zakat's concern for the poor and the trust point the same way.

Secular / non-religious perspective

Non-religious people generally hold that the universe requires no creator and that its order is explained by physics and evolution. Responsibility for the planet is owed to other human beings, present and future, rather than to an owner. Some argue further that sentience rather than species grounds moral status, which makes the interests of animals count directly and treats the idea of a trust as a story rather than a fact.

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

Evaluation

The hinge: Whether human distinctiveness is a licence or a duty. Islam, atheism and animal-rights philosophy all agree humans are different; everything turns on what follows.

Defensible conclusions

• The trusteeship framing is stronger than a secular duty because it does not weaken when nobody is watching — and it is only available to those who accept the accountability.
• The religious and secular positions reach almost the same practical conclusions, so the disagreement about to whom the duty is owed matters less in practice than in argument.
• Neither grounding settles the hard cases, and what actually decides them is the weighing of present human need against environmental cost.

Not defensible

• Claiming Islam is indifferent to the environment — the vocabulary of khalifah, amanah and mizan is Qur'anic and specific.
• Confusing khalifah as humanity's role with 'Caliph' as a historical political office; the 2022 report records candidates going wrong on the Caliphs.

Exam use

• Identify · 3 marks — Three ways religious people can care for the planet, or three Muslim beliefs about creation. Short phrases only.
• Outline · 4 marks — Two beliefs, each developed. 'Muslims believe they are khalifah (1) — trustees of an earth that belongs to Allah, and they will be judged on how they kept it (1).'
• Explain · 6 marks — Explain why Muslims believe they should care for the environment: khalifah, amanah, the judgement, and the prohibition on waste — each followed by what a Muslim therefore does.
• Evaluate · 12 marks — 'The world would be a better place without humans.' Use khalifah on the side of human necessity: removing humanity removes the only creature capable of repairing the trust.

Common mistakes

• Writing about the environment generally with no Islamic vocabulary, which the grid caps as generic.
• Using 'khalifah' and 'Caliph' interchangeably — one is humanity's role, the other a historical office.
• Naming a belief without saying what a Muslim therefore does, which leaves the AO2 half unmet.

“The Rightly-Guided Caliphs lead Muslim communities today, like imams.” — The four Rightly-Guided Caliphs led the community in the seventh century, immediately after the Prophet. An imam today leads prayer in a mosque. They are separated by fourteen centuries and by function.

Write instead: The Rashidun — Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali — are historical figures whose leadership Sunni Muslims regard as a model. Today's leadership is exercised by imams, and by the Ulema as scholars of law and belief. Shi'a Muslims understand the succession quite differently, holding that leadership belonged to Ali and the Imams of the Prophet's family. (Named in the 2022 examiner report for Paper 2.)

Grade 9 insight

The Qur'anic account has a feature no other creation narrative on this specification has: the angels object. When Allah announces the khalifah, the angels ask whether he will place there one who will cause corruption and shed blood — and the answer is not that they are wrong about human behaviour. That makes Islamic trusteeship a responsibility given with the risk fully acknowledged, which is a far more interesting basis for an environmental argument than a simple grant of authority.

Carry on through Islam

• Next unit: 1.2 · Human nature and the human condition
• The universe and the place of human beings in the other religions: Buddhism · Christianity · Hinduism · Judaism · Sikhism
• All of Islam · Incandio Religious Studies · The 4RS1 specification