Written and collected by Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times

Ghulam Ahmed Pervaiz (1903–1985) was an Islamic scholar known for his Quran-centric, modernist interpretations. His understanding of Satan (Shayṭān/Iblīs) departs from traditional literalist views. Below is an overview of Pervaiz’s perspective on Satan’s nature, role, Quranic interpretation, and how it compares to mainstream Sunni and Shia theology, with references to his writings.

Satan’s Nature in Pervaiz’s Interpretation

Pervaiz did not view Satan as a literal supernatural being like a fallen angel or jinn; instead, he interpreted “Satan” as a symbolic or psychological force within humans. In his analysis, Quranic terms for the devil refer to qualities or impulses in the human self:

• Personification of Desires: Pervaiz explicitly stated that “Iblis or Satan – these terms represent human emotions and desires.” ​resurgentislam.com In other words, Satan is essentially the personification of a person’s base urges, temptations, and rebellious instincts rather than an external entity.
• Rebellious Instincts: He explained that when a person’s emotions incite him to break God’s laws, “he becomes rebellious. This is shaitānīya (devilishness)…” and when the person later faces the bad consequences and falls into despair, “this is iblīsīya.” Thus, “Satan” and “Iblis” in the Quran symbolize two aspects of the same human tendency – the initial rebellious impulse and the subsequent despair​. Pervaiz concluded that “Iblees and Shaitaan are not two different entities. They are two different aspects of the same deed”, and the plural “shayāṭīn” signifies the various evil forces or influences that urge humans to rebel against divine law​.
• Not an Independent Being: By defining Satan as an aspect of the human self, Pervaiz effectively denied that Satan is an independent living creature with a physical or spiritual form. For example, he noted that “human desires and emotions are referred to as ‘Satan’” in the Quran, emphasizing an internal, metaphorical understanding. He described “Satan” as “man’s rebellious emotions and [the] intellect which follows these emotions,”​ rather than a literal demon.

In summary, Pervaiz saw Satan as a metaphor for the evil inclinations within the human psyche. This modernist interpretation means Satan’s reality is psychological and moral, not a corporeal being lurking in the unseen world.

Satan’s Role in Human Free Will

Given Pervaiz’s view of Satan as symbolic of inner tendencies, he believed the “devil” influences humans from within their own selves. This has direct implications for free will and moral responsibility:

• Internal Whispers, Not External Force: Pervaiz interpreted Quranic “whispers” of Satan (waswasa) as the inner promptings of a person’s own mind. He pointed out that the Quran itself says “We are well aware of the misgivings that his own mind (nafs) conjures up” ​resurgentislam.com – highlighting that the source of evil suggestions lies in one’s psyche. Thus, what people attribute to Satan’s whisper is, in Pervaiz’s view, actually one’s inner voice tempting oneself​ resurgentislam.com.
• No Possession or Compulsion: Because “Satan” is not an independent agent for Pervaiz, it cannot compel a person to sin against their will. He frequently stressed human accountability: Satan has “no authority over you…and you were not bound to follow [him]; [he] invited you [to evil] and you accepted”. Here Pervaiz cites the Quranic statement of Satan on Judgment Day, affirming that the devil only calls and it is humans who choose to respond. This means humans cannot blame an external Devil for their misdeeds – the choice always remains one’s own.
• Symbol of Temptation and Choice: Pervaiz saw Satan’s “role” as a symbolic way to describe the struggle of human free will. Every person faces lower impulses (labeled as Shayṭān) urging them toward wrongful desires, and it is up to one’s conscious self to resist or give in. He interpreted that “emotions instigate human actions”, which can lead to great harm if not guided by divine revelation​. However, following God’s guidance fortifies a person such that “‘Satan’ can never overcome those people who tread under the guidance of revelation,”​ In essence, Satan represents temptation, and yielding to it or overcoming it is part of the exercise of free will.
• Human Responsibility: By viewing Satan as a manifestation of human desire, Pervaiz’s theology puts full responsibility on humans for their actions. He argued that the Quranic narrative underscores this accountability – Satan merely “makes false promises” and “adorns evil deeds” to look tempting, but has no coercive power​. Therefore, the “devil” in Pervaiz’s interpretation is an embodiment of the internal and external influences that a person must morally overcome, rather than a separate being to blame.

Pervaiz’s Quranic Interpretation of Satan

Pervaiz approached the Quran conceptually and allegorically on this topic, often reinterpreting classical stories and terms:

• Adam and Iblis as Allegory: Traditional exegesis treats Adam, Eve, and Iblis as real figures in a historical event. Pervaiz, by contrast, read the story as a metaphorical depiction of humanity’s moral journey. He asserted that “‘Adam’ does not signify an individual but the human race,”, and that the Quranic account of Adam’s temptation illustrates how human beings, endowed with free will and intellect, can fall prey to desires. He noted the Quran does not even name Eve (Ḥawwā’) in this story, seeing it not as a tale of two specific people but as symbolic of mankind. According to Pervaiz, Adam’s sojourn in “Paradise” and fall to earth represents early humanity transitioning from a state of innocence to the moral consciousness of earthly life.
• Satan’s Temptation as a Metaphor: In Pervaiz’s reading, Satan whispering to Adam is a figurative way to describe man’s own temptation. He explicitly wrote that the Quran “stated metaphorically: ‘Then Satan whispered to him (Adam)…’” when describing the allure of the forbidden tree. In his analysis, the “tree of eternity” that Satan promised and the subsequent exposure of Adam and his wife’s nakedness are symbolic elements – e.g. the tree representing the human lust for immortality or legacy through offspring​. By this interpretation, Satan’s Quranic role is an allegory for how human desires can deceive one into wrongdoing under the illusion of benefit.
• Iblīs and Shayṭān – Two Words, One Reality: The Quran uses “Iblis” (as a proper name for the Devil in the Adam story) and “shayṭān” (common noun for ‘devil’ or ‘satan’). Pervaiz studied the Quranic usage of both and concluded they refer to the same phenomenon from different angles. He noted that some verses attribute Adam’s temptation to Iblis and others to “the shayṭān,” and that both terms are sometimes used interchangeably in the text​. From this he deduced: “Iblis and Shaitaan are two sides of the same coin…two different aspects of the same deed.”​ Rather than being two separate beings, “Shayṭān” for Pervaiz denotes the act of inciting rebellion, while “Iblis” denotes the state of despair and failure that follows rebellion​. This nuanced interpretation is unconventional, essentially turning Quranic names into descriptions of stages of wrongdoing.
• Reinterpreting Unseen Beings: Pervaiz’s broader Quranic hermeneutics often redefined metaphysical entities in rational terms. Just as he viewed angels (malā’ika) as forces of nature or divine laws rather than winged celestial beings​, he understood jinn and devils in a non-literal way. He cited Surah An-Nās (114) – which speaks of devils “from among jinn and men” – to emphasize that the “devils” include human sources of evil​. He interpreted “jinn” as invisible or hidden elements (sometimes even humans with fiery temperaments or nomadic peoples, according to modernist theories), though in his writings he primarily stresses that “it is men themselves who are responsible for these devilish acts.”​ In sum, Pervaiz read the Quranic discourse on Satan as a poetic way of describing human psychology, moral choice, and social evil, rather than as literal reportage of unseen creatures at work.

Pervaiz’s Quranic interpretation of Satan is therefore highly metaphorical and systemically tied to his naturalistic understanding of Quranic terminology. It differs markedly from classical tafsīr, aiming to extract ethical and philosophical lessons about the human self.

Comparison with Mainstream Islamic Views

Pervaiz’s views on Satan diverge significantly from mainstream Sunni and Shia Islamic theology. A comparison highlights key differences:

• Literal vs. Metaphorical Existence: In orthodox Sunni and Shia belief, Satan (Iblis) is a real, living being created by God. The prevalent view is that Iblis was a jinn (not an angel) who disobeyed God and was cursed ​shiavault.com. He is regarded as the leader of actual malevolent spirits (shayāṭīn) who attempt to misguide humans. For example, traditional exegesis holds that Iblis physically tempted Adam and Eve in the Garden, and had a dialog with God, receiving respite until Judgment Day. By contrast, Pervaiz rejects Satan as an external entity – for him Satan exists only as a conceptual persona of human urges, not as an independent jinn or demon. This is a modernist reinterpretation that many orthodox scholars would consider unorthodox.
• Ontology of Satan: Sunni theology, drawing on Quran and Hadith, affirms that jinn (including Satan) are part of the unseen creation. “Supernatural beings do exist… They are creatures that live with us, yet apart from us…Shayṭān is a jinn, not an angel,” as one explanation notes ​islamreligion.com. Shia scholars likewise teach that Iblis “was one of the jinn…not an angel” and was cast out due to his arrogance. Pervaiz’s position, however, demythologizes this entirely – he often treated such Quranic narratives as allegories or metaphors needed to convey moral truths to an audience in a vivid way, rather than literal cosmology. This places him at odds with the creedal requirement of believing in the existence of jinn and angels as real entities, a point on which Sunnis and Shias agree (as part of believing in the unseen).
• Satan’s Influence: In mainstream Islam, Satan is believed to actively tempt and whisper to humans. While orthodox scholars also emphasize that Satan only invites and cannot force a person to sin (humans still have free will), they maintain that an external force is at play. For instance, it is taught that “Satan was the cause of the first sin ever committed and till today entices people to disbelief, oppression and transgression.” ​Rituals like seeking refuge in Allah from Satan’s whispers (isti‘ādha), believing in demonic whisperings (waswas), and even cases of demonic possession or evil eye are part of traditional doctrine. Pervaiz’s view minimizes or eliminates the supernatural element – what others call Satan’s whisper, he calls one’s own inner promptings​. Practices against Satan would, in his view, essentially equate to controlling one’s ego and desires through God-consciousness, rather than warding off an unseen creature. This rationalistic approach is more in line with psychological self-discipline than with the dualist struggle (human vs. devil) envisioned by classical theology.
• Interpretative Tradition: Sunni and Shia traditions rely on a vast corpus of tafsīr and Hadith to explain Satan’s story (e.g. whether Iblis was a fallen angel or always a jinn, how he has offspring, etc.). Pervaiz, however, rejected the authority of Hadith in creedal matters and relied almost solely on the Quran interpreted via language and reason​. This led him to reinterpret or ignore many folklore details about Satan that are commonly accepted. For instance, where a traditional scholar might narrate how Iblis asked for the ability to run in human veins or how he breathes into anger, Pervaiz would instead focus on the Quranic phrasing and its metaphorical implications for human behavior, often dismissing literal supernatural tales as later accretions. Thus, his approach is in stark contrast with mainstream exegetical narratives cherished in Sunni/Shia piety.
• Sufi and Philosophical Parallels: It is worth noting that Pervaiz’s inner interpretation has some partial echoes in Islamic thought, though not equivalence. Sufi literature often speaks of the “greater jihad” being against one’s own lower self (nafs), and sometimes identifies the nafs al-ammāra (the commanding ego) as a “satan” within. Even so, Sufis and orthodox scholars still accept the actual existence of Iblis. Pervaiz essentially collapsed the external Satan into the internal nafs, which is a more radical stance. Similarly, modern reformist scholars like Muhammad Asad and others have at times suggested that Quranic descriptions of Satan and angels could be understood symbolically, but these views remain minority and sometimes controversial. Mainstream Islamic theology, both Sunni and Shia, continues to uphold a real cosmological Devil, making Pervaiz’s purely symbolic interpretation a notable departure from orthodox belief.

In summary, while Sunni and Shia Muslims generally regard Satan as a real jinn who personifies evil and tests humans, G.A. Pervaiz saw “Satan” as a Quranic idiom for the human capacity for evil. His view aligns with a rationalist and metaphorical understanding of scripture, differing sharply from the traditional supernatural worldview.

References to Pervaiz’s Writings on Satan

Pervaiz discussed his ideas on Satan across several works. Key references include:

• “Iblīs-o-Adam” (Devil and Adam) – Urdu book first published 1945, later translated into English as The Human Self and Iblees. This work is devoted to analyzing the Quranic concept of Satan in relation to the human self. Pervaiz expounds his thesis that Iblis/Shaytan symbolizes human rebelliousness and despair, citing Quranic verses to support this interpretation ​resurgentislam.com​. The book systematically reinterprets the Adam and Iblis story and related Quranic passages. (Reference: G.A. Pervaiz, Iblis-o-Adam, 1945; Eng. trans. “The Human Self and Iblees”, Tolue Islam Trust).
• “What is Islam?” – Book by Pervaiz (Urdu: Islam Kya Hai?), which includes discussions on fundamental concepts. In this book, Pervaiz (or his editors/translators) reiterate that Satan refers to man’s base “desires and emotions.” A footnote in the English edition explicitly states: “By Satan is meant man’s rebellious emotions and the intellect which follows these emotions.” ​resurgentislam.com. It also directs readers to the Iblees and Adam book for a detailed study ​resurgentislam.com. (Reference: G.A. Pervaiz, Islam: A Challenge to Religion (English compilation), and What is Islam?, tr. Ejaz Rasool, 1968).
• Quranic Exposition and Lectures: Pervaiz produced a Quran commentary in Urdu, “Mafhūm-ul-Qur’ān”, and frequently wrote in his monthly journal Tolu-e-Islam. Within these, he often touched on the concept of Shaytan while explaining relevant verses. For instance, his commentary on Surah Al-Baqarah and Al-A‘raf covers the story of Adam and Iblis, where he emphasizes that Adam symbolizes mankind and Satan symbolizes the forces of evil within and around man ​resurgentislam.com. Transcriptions of his lectures in Lahore (Dars-e-Qur’an) also capture his explanations of Iblis as a metaphor. (Reference: Parwez, Mafhoom-ul-Qur’an, vol.1, discussion on 2:30-36; Parwez’s Quran study circle lectures circa 1960s — archived in audio form by Tolue-Islam Trust).
• Dictionary of the Quran (Lughat-ul-Quran): Pervaiz compiled an Urdu lexicon of Quranic terms. In it, he gives linguistic and contextual meanings of words like “Shaytān” and “Iblīs.” He notes the root meanings (e.g. shaytān from shatana, “to be distant” or shata, “to burn with anger”) and then explains the Quranic usage as “a force that hinders human development by igniting rebellious passions”, rather than a literal monster ​resurgentislam.com​. This reference work reinforces how his understanding of Satan is grounded in metaphor and language. (Reference: G.A. Pervaiz, Lughat-ul-Qur’an, 4 vols, see entry under “Shin-Ṭa-Nun (Shaitan)”).
• Tolu-e-Islam Magazine Articles: Throughout the 1940s–1970s, Pervaiz authored numerous essays. One such essay (archived on the TolueIslam website) titled “Insān aur Shaytān” or “Man and Satan” summarizes his view for a general audience. It echoes that every human carries an internal satan in the form of ego and wrongful desires, and urges a Quranic approach to overcome these impulses. (Reference: Article “Man and Satan” in Tolu-e-Islam magazine, circa 1950s; also available as “Parwez on Adam, Insaan, Malaika, Iblis, Satan” PDF on tolueislam.com​wikipedia.nucleos.com).

Each of the above sources provides insight into Pervaiz’s theological interpretation. His consistent theme is to demystify Satan: replacing the fear of an external Devil with an understanding of one’s own inner moral challenges. These works collectively serve as a comprehensive reference to Pervaiz’s unorthodox yet influential views on the concept of Satan in Islam, framed entirely through the lens of the Quran and human psychology.