M6:418 — در چه کردی جهد کان وا تو نگشت / تو چه کاریدی که نامد ریع کشت

Translation: Where did you strive, that its fruit did not return to you? / What did you sow, that its harvest yield did not come forth? Meaning: This couplet, delivered as a rhetorical question, powerfully asserts that every human endeavor or act, whether good or ill, inevitably yields direct and undeniable consequences for the doer; no action goes without its inherent return.

This pivotal couplet, found in the sixth and final book of the Masnavi, represents the apex of Rumi’s thought on the perennial philosophical problem of free will versus determinism. In this late stage of his intellectual life, Rumi decidedly leans towards emphasizing human free will and the undeniable role of the individual in shaping their own destiny. This verse serves as a direct rebuttal to those who attribute their actions to fate, divine decree, or mere luck.

I have often highlighted Rumi's preference for Adam’s self-reproach, “anā ẓalamnā nafsanā” (we have wronged ourselves), over Iblis’s blame-shifting, “aghwaytanī” (You led me astray). This fundamental difference in accepting responsibility is the essence of free will. Rumi explicitly states that both divine decree (qaḍā) and human effort (jahd) are real (ḥaqq), and one must perceive both with clear vision, not with the “one-eyed” (aʿwar) view of Iblis.

One of Rumi’s most potent arguments for free will is the phenomenon of “taraddud” or indecision. When faced with multiple paths, humans hesitate, pondering which to choose. This hesitation is a clear sign of innate “power” and “choice.” You never hesitate over something you are utterly incapable of doing; for instance, no one asks, “Shall I fly high or dive to the bottom of the sea?” because they know both are beyond their capacity. Hesitation occurs only within the realm of possible and voluntary actions, unequivocally testifying to our power of choice.

The verse in question reinforces this logic with everyday examples: “Where did you strive, that its fruit did not return to you? What did you sow, that its harvest yield did not come forth?” These are rhetorical questions whose answers are self-evident: “Nowhere! Nothing!” Meaning, there is no effort that does not yield a result for you, and no sowing that fails to produce a harvest. Human action is like a child born of one’s soul and body, and “like your child, it will cling to your skirt.” This is what I refer to as the “intrinsic retribution of deeds” (jazā-yi dhātī-yi aʿmāl); the outcome of every action is not an arbitrary, external reward, but a consequence that springs from the very nature of the act itself.

Consequently, Rumi regards preoccupation with “luck” (bakht) as a harmful practice that makes one’s vision “cross-eyed” (aʿwal) and renders them “lazy” (kāhil). He calls upon the valiant to “accuse your own self, young man; accuse less the recompense of justice,” meaning they should always hold their own soul accountable for its actions and refrain from blaming divine justice or shifting responsibility to others. Repentance (tawba), itself an expression of free will, originates from this very perspective; for if humans were not free, repentance and seeking forgiveness would be meaningless. To deny free will is to deny the “self” (khwīshtan); if we are not free agents, then there is no “I,” and we would merely be conduits for external forces. Yet, Rumi asserts, “the affirmation of the self is the affirmation of free will.”

Key takeaways

• In the sixth book of the Masnavi, Rumi unequivocally asserts human free will and personal responsibility for one's actions.
• Hesitation and indecision when choosing between options are strong indicators of innate free will.
• Every effort and every action inevitably yields direct and proportionate consequences for the doer, without delay.
• Unlike Iblis, humans must accept responsibility for their deeds, accusing their own self rather than fate or luck.
• The 'intrinsic retribution of deeds' means that the consequence of an action arises from the action itself, not from external judgment.
• Denying free will is tantamount to denying the 'self,' as acknowledging a 'self' implies a share in agency and responsibility.