The difference between the mission of Moses and Khidr in “Creation (Takwin) System” and “Legislation (Tashri) System”

The difference between the mission of Moses and Khidr in “Creation (Takwin) System” and “Legislation (Tashri) System”

The most significant issue by which the great scholars has been preoccupied with, is the triple adventures of this wise man against Moses. Since Moses was not aware of the essence of that issue, he started to protest but later he was convinced when he heard the explanations of the master. The question is that, is it really possible to damage the properties of a person without his permission in order to prevent them from being damaged by a violator? Can a teenage boy be punished for a sin he will commit in the future?! Is it necessary that someone be put into trouble or forced to labor gratis so as to preserve the properties of a person?!

There are two approaches regarding these questions:

The first is to compare them with Principles of Jurisprudence, like what a group of interpreters have done. First they have considered this story in accordance with the “law of important and the most important” and have stated that: preserving the ship had certainly been the most important thing to do while preserving it from minor damage had not been an important issue. In other words, here Khidr had preferred to choose the bad thing over the worst. Especially, the inner consent of the owners of the ship was predictable if they became aware of this issue. (According to Principles of Jurisprudence, Khidr had implicit permission from that teenage boy about that matter). This group of interpreters insist that he had been mature, apostate or even corrupt. So because of his current deeds, he deserved to be killed and also if Khidr refers to his crimes in the future as the cause of his action, , it is due to the fact that he intends to say that this criminal boy is not only currently committing crimes but also in the future he will commit greater crimes. Therefore, on the basis of Sharia law and also his current actions, the action of killing him had been permissible. But regarding the third matter, it has to be mentioned that nobody could object why you sacrificed for others and put yourself into trouble gratis so as to preserve their properties from being damaged. Here the sacrifice may not be necessary but certainly it is a good deed and worthy of praise. Also sometimes the sacrifice becomes a necessary action like when an orphan is in danger of losing his numerous assets and it is possible to prevent it with little effort. It is not unlikely that in such cases it is an obligatory action. The second way is based on the fact that although the above mentioned descriptions are convincing about the treasure and the wall, regarding the teenage boy who was killed, it is to some extent inconsistent with the appearance of verse because presumably he was killed due to his future actions and deeds and not his current ones. The issue of the ship is somewhat controversial. Can we damage the house or property of whomever we suppose whose house or property will be confiscated in the future, without even informing him and in order to save him from danger? Do jurisprudents really accept such a rule? Therefore we must follow another way and it is as the following: Accordingly there are two systems in this world: “Creation System” and “Legislation System”. Although these two systems are coordinated and integrated in their general principles, but sometimes they are discrete in their details. For example God tests His servants with something of fear (Insecurity) and “a loss of wealth and lives and fruits” a loss of lives and the loved ones in order to determine the people who are patient against these events. Can any scholar or prophet perform such actions? It means that for example he puts his wealth, life, fruits and security in danger in order for people to be tested or for example God afflicted some of his Prophets or righteous servants to great tribulations in order to train or warn them for giving up the most important issues in favor of the important ones. Likewise the plight of Jacob was due to paying little attention to the needy and also the discomfort of Jonah was because of giving up the most important issues in favor of the important ones. Does anyone have the right to commit such actions as a punishment or penalty? Or sometimes we observe that God deprives people of a blessing because of their ingratitude. For instance, he has lost his properties at the sea for not being grateful, or he has not been grateful for being healthy and God deprives him of this blessing. According to the principles of jurisprudence or Sharia law, can anybody damage the properties of a person or put his health in danger because of not being grateful? There are many such examples in this regard. They generally indicate that this world and especially the creation of Human is based on the best systems because in order for human to follow the evolutionary path, in terms of creation, God has made some rules and regulations that violating them will give rise to different reactions. However, in terms of Sharia law, all of them cannot be considered within the framework of these rules.

For example a physician can cut a person’s finger in order to avoid the transmission of poison into his heart. But can anybody cut the finger of a person for not being grateful of his blessings or for improving his patience?! (While certainly God could do such a thing). Now that it was confirmed that we have two systems and that God dominates these two systems, therefore nothing prevents God from making a group of people responsible for implementing the rules of the Legislation System and also a group of Angels or some humans (like Khidr) for the Creation System. According to the Creation System, since an immature child might be so dangerous for other people in the future in case that he stays alive, God can even cause an event to occur to him in a way that he be killed on that event. Accordingly sometimes the reason why God cause these people to stay alive is to test them and the like. Also sometimes God make a person suffer from a serious illness and therefore he is forced to stay at home because He (God) knows that if he leaves, a dangerous incident will occur to him and he deserves by God to be kept safe from the danger. In other words, in this world, a group of the God’s agents are responsible for the issues relating to human’s heart and the others are responsible for the affairs relating to their appearances. Those agents who are responsible for the hearts have their own specific rules, principles and programs as those who are responsible for the appearances. It is true that the outline of these two programs lead both kinds of humans towards the perfection and that they are coordinated in this regard but sometimes like the above mentioned examples, they are discrete in their details. However, no one can act arbitrarily in any of these two paths but he must have permission from the rightful owner or ruler. Therefore, Khidr clearly expressed this truth and said: “I did it not of my own accord” and also I had never performed that action by myself, but I stepped exactly based on a divine program and a path which had been provided for me. As a result this conflict will be resolved. The reason why Moses could not tolerate what Khidr did was that their missions were of two discrete paths. So every time he observed he had taken steps against appearances of the Sharia law, he cried out to protest while Khidr calmly continued what he was doing and since these two great divine leaders could not live together forever due to their different missions, he (Khidr) said: “This is parting between me and you.”

Anyhow Khidr’s (pbuh) deeds and especially the act of killing the teenage boy was apparently embarrassing but it has to be taken into consideration that there is a difference between the Creation System and Legislation System and that God dominates these two systems. Therefore, God can make a group of people like Moses (pbuh) responsible for implementing the rules of the Legislation System and it is very natural. Likewise He can make a group or a person (like Khidr) responsible for the rules of the Creation System. According to the Creation System, since an immature child might be so dangerous for other people in the future in case that he stays alive, God can even cause an event to occur to him in a way that he be killed on that event. It is like when a Surgeon cuts the hand or the foot of a person in order to prevent the other parts of his body from getting infected with the cancerous tumors. As previously mentioned what Khidr (pbuh) did, was in the domain of the Creation System but Moses (pbuh) performed his actions in the domain of the Legislation System. Hence, in this regard the status of Moses (pbuh) was higher than Khidr (pbuh), despite the fact that Khidr (pbuh) was on a higher status in the domain of the Creation System. From the other hand the deeds of Khidr (pbuh) included the signs of divine mercy of God and His reward for his faithful father and mother. Khidr killed that infidel child by God’s leave because if he stayed alive, he might deviate his parents from the right path but instead of their son,s God bestowed upon them a daughter who was faithful and pious and accordingly Imam Sadiq (pbuh) has stated in this regard: Seventy prophets were born from his generation.

1 - Tafsir Noor al-Thaqalayn, vol. 3, p. 286

2 - Tafsir al-Mizan, vol. 12, pp. 505-509

3 - Tafsir Nemooneh, vol. 12, pp. 506-509