Presence Of Mind by Taqiuddin Nabhani

Regardless of the details and the elements of spontaniety, its reality is the speed of thinking and the speed of judgement. If the woman said to the Ameer ul-Mu’mineen that her husband stands the night in prayer and fasts the day, quick understanding that this is a complaint would lead to a quick judgement based on it being a complaint. This is spontaniety. The Ameer ul-Mu’mineen did not have spontaniety, so he considered this to be praise for the husband.

Thus he did not understand, nor did he make judgement with anything on her statement. One of the attendants had spontaniety when he quickly understood that this statement was not praise, so he was quick in judging this statement as being a complaint.

Therefore, he had spontaniety.

Thus, the reality of spontaniety is in the speed in understanding the speech, the action, or anything else, and quick judgement on it.

This speed of understanding and speed of judgement is spontaniety. It might occur to the mind that quick understanding is quick judgement, but the reality is that quick understanding prepares for the judgement; it is not the judgement itself. The fact that the attendant understood that statement as being a complaint prepared him to judge on it as a complaint. This understanding was not the judgement, it was rather the understanding only. The understanding before the issuance of the judgement does not need any reaction or response. Rather it is an understanding only. If there was a judgement, then action took place and the matter was settled. The basis and the result are in the judgement and not the understanding.

Understanding is only a rational process. The man who had spontaniety understood that this woman spoke about her husband; he understood that she spoke to the Ameer ul-Mu’mineen, so the rational process occurred in him in understanding that this was a complaint. Thus, the judgement was the result of understanding, and understanding was only a rational process. Therefore, there must be quick understanding and quick judgement before issuing the judgement, so that spontaniety exists. Thus, spontaniety is quick understanding followed immediately by quick judgement. In such a way spontaniety exists. Accordingly, the reality of spontaniety is quick understanding and quick judgement, in such a way that quick understanding would prepare for the judgement or quick judgement. Therefore, it must precede rather than come after the judgement. Judgement cannot dispense with it, though its presence indicates the presence of judgement.

If understanding is necessary, then judgement is also necessary. If the understanding existed, then definitely judgement existed. Thus, the origin is the understanding. Had Omar bin al-Khattab understood that the woman complained about her husband, he would have heard her statement as a complaint. He heard it however as praise and therefore he did not take notice of her problem. So, the situation remained as it had been and her complaint was of no use; for though she complained, she however complained with an expression not understood by the one whom she complained to.

That is why her complaint was not heard. Due to the absence of spontaniety towards that complaint, the complaint was abandoned and not observed, as if it had not existed. Therefore, it should have been understood that she meant to complain and not praise, in order for the understanding of the complaint to have been realised.

This is important practically with people who are shy of expressing complaints explicitly, or they fear that the complaint may be rejected. Therefore, spontaniety should be employed with the people so as to fulfil their aims. The aim of the woman was to remove the injustice from her, which no one could remove except the Ameer ul-Mu’mineen. The aim of Omar bin al-Khattab was to remove the injustice from the people, as Ameer to the Mu’mineen.

He, however, did not understand that she complained about her husband and so he did not achieve his aim in removing the injustice.

Rather the injustice remained as it had been. So the husband continued to stand the night in prayer and fast the day and the woman remained deprived of her marital relationship and rights.

Thus, as a result of the absence of spontaniety the injustice remained. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the reality of spontaniety, that it is quick understanding and quick judgement.

Unless it is understood in this manner, it will not exist. The result of this will be the presence of injustice and the risk of falling into danger. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the reality of spontaniety so that it exists.