A Comparative Study of the Theme of "the Justification of God’s Providence" in the Outlooks of Sa’di and Alexander Pope

There are three distinct concepts discussed in world poetry which are the trinity of creation: God, Man, and the Universe. The mystics, including great poets, as well as classical philosophers and theosophists, have integrated the three concepts into One who is the final unique essence and the source of all Truth, the First Cause and the Last Return. The descriptions presented by Sa’di and Pope to introduce God, clearly reveal their implicated belief in the theory of ‘the unity of being’, presented first by Parmenides, the Pre-socratic philosopher. This theory is a common heritage of human theosophy and there is no difference here between the east and the west, the Antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and the Age of Reason. Sa’di and Pope, well-nourished in the tradition of divine truth and divine unity, regard man and all the universe as created by the unique and Necessary Being who is God, and view the universe as the emanation of that Supreme Being and see all the creatures as singing devotional hymns in a ‘cosmic prayer’. This philosophical consciousness of God has extended to cover the theme of ‘divine providence and wisdom’ which has been discussed all through history amongst philosophers, theologists, and poets. One can refer to Plato and Aristotle, Aquinas and Augustine, Dante and Milton as exemplars discussing the question in detail. The present paper treats the controversial theme in the works of Sa’di and Alexander Pope, and endeavors to demonstrate the essential affinities and similarities in the ideas of the two poets and to expose their differences.
 

This study is a descriptive and library-based research. It is carried out in the light of the American school of comparative literature and the dominant approach is taken from the field of comparative literature itself, namely thematic. S. S. Prawer (1925-2012), the eminent author of Comparative Literary Studies: An Introduction (1973) has identified five different overlapping areas for the exploration of themes: a) the representation of natural phenomena man’s reaction to them; or of eternal facts of human existence; or of perennial human problems and patterns of behavior b) recurring motifs, c) recurrent situations, d) the literary representation of types, e) the literary representation of named personages (99-100). The present research falls under the second category and attempts to analyze the poems of the two bards to reveal the similarities as well as the differences between the two thinkers in their justification of God’s providence.
 

In the realm of literature, many spiritual poets of the world have been preoccupied with the concept of God and His penetration into the universe. Such poets have not questioned the existence of God and have not accordingly offered any demonstration to prove His existence; they have rather offered hymns in his praise. Sa’di’s Bustan opens with an extensive list of God’s transcendent and immanent attributes followed by lofty laudations of Him. Similarly, Pope’s transcendental poem, “The Universal Prayer”, is perhaps the best example of his devotional expressions on God. It is a sublime encomium of the Almighty as the sole source, first and final cause of creation who is beyond all comprehension.
Besides such majestic praises, the main item of the theological agenda of Sa’di and Pope is, in the words of John Milton, ‘to justify the ways of God to man’ and to demonstrate how everything is right with the world. The clearest account of God’s providence and predestination of all that occurs to man has been given in the Quran in Chapter Hadid 57, verses22-23. The first verse confirms the basic idea that God has written down all that is going to happen and the second verse is a consolation for people that they should not grieve on whatever they have failed to achieve, nor should they take vain pride in the bounties bestowed on them. Sa’di, believing in the first idea, uses the second as the basic moral wisdom of why people should submit themselves to the will of God. In Persian culture, the word hekmat is used to refer to some hidden reason which exists behind all events but it is not to be seen by everyone. This is a belief that all occurrences which does not win our favor is somehow a blessing in disguise and has a justification. Sa’di has tried to convince his readers of the divine wisdom in all aspects of life, although they cannot comprehend it. He holds that: ‘It is an instance of wisdom if the Creator / Causes a servant to make the general welfare his special duty’. Many adversities, hardships, and deprivations that befall man are truly privileges unknown to him. Sa’di has tried to justify God’s providence as opposed to man’s desires and show the incongruity between God’s omniscient design and man’s parochial self-love. This idea has been repeatedly confirmed by Sa’di in a number of insightful tales.
In one qasidah which concentrates directly on preaching, Sa’di criticizes those people who find unfair faults with the design of creation and ‘deem the painter unskilled’ and clarifies that the unskillfulness comes from their own crooked observation. Accordingly, all the plans of God are rationalized in the light of divine wisdom, all seeming evil is caused by some good reason, and the contrast between good and evil is the result of man’s ill judgement and failure to understand the insight in the providence of God.
In his well-known philosophical poem An Essay on Man, Pope argues that man must accept that in the scale of creation there is a special ‘rank’ and place assigned for him. He demonstrates that whatever man regards as imperfection and misplacement is truly in the right place when considered in relation to the position of other creatures. This great fact is sufficient to justify all man considers to be inharmonious, for as Pope clarifies: “Tis a part we see, and not a whole” (line 60). Pope deems that God has ‘hidden the book of fate’ from all creatures except for the allowed pages which belong to the present time. And as God has concealed the knowledge of man from beasts, similarly, he has covered the eyes of men from the knowledge bestowed to spirits and angels. Otherwise, none could bear the plight he has to suffer on earth. The word ‘suffer’ is the key to God’s rule of hiding future events. Pope explains that if the lamb that is being taken to the slaughterhouse would know of its preeminent fate, it would be so frightened that it would flee and it would not engage itself in playing and skipping (lines 80-82). But out of God’s grace, the lamb remains unaware of its destiny and can enjoy its life to the last moment. Accordingly, Pope advises man to be wiser and not to weigh his raw opinions against God’s comprehensive design for creation, and avoid calling God’s works imperfect. For Pope, the source of all wrong judgments of man is pride and vanity. This pride ascends even to heaven and interferes with celestial dwellers, and commands that man should ascend to the level of angels and angels should achieve the status of gods. Pope enlightens man that “The first Almighty Cause / Acts not by partial, but by gen’ral laws” (line 146). Thus, if man submits himself to such a wise and omniscient providence, he will have no objection to whatever bestowed on him or whatever reserved from him and will see the truth that “Whatever is, is right” (line 294).
 

The affinities of thoughts and ideas between Sa’di and Alexander Pope originate from the similar religious faith and theological outlooks they have inherited. They have submitted themselves to the main principles and frameworks of their respective Islamic and Christian creeds which recommend the essential belief in Spirituality and the general theological ideals shared by all religions throughout history. That is why the five centuries that divide the two poets and their various social lives have not affected their basic intellectual views. The differences and incongruities, however, are generally derived from their vehicles of expression rather than the tenets and thoughts. Additionally, Sa’di is more like a preacher and story-teller, while Pope is a more like an academic teacher dedicated to logical arguments for convincing his audience. Whereas Sa’di’s ideas are scattered throughout his works, Pope has presented his outlooks in a consistent and systematic way.