By Santosh Mehrotra
Economists have been writing for some months that, contrary to the claims of the government, there is plenty of data available that shows unmistakably that unemployment is high and rising.
Educated unemployment has worsened just as young people are getting better educated, and expect to work outside agriculture in industry and services.
We have done this on the strength of analysis of household surveys – Annual Survey, Labour Bureau (LB) 2015-16 – with a sample size the same or larger than the five-yearly employment-unemployment surveys of the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO).
We also used survey data, available since 2016, of the Centre for Monitoring of the Indian Economy (CMIE), which has a sample size larger than the LB Annual Survey and the NSSO surveys. Both surveys that were used cover both rural and urban, and both organised and unorganised sector employment.
In a nutshell, they capture both EPFO/NPS (organised) as well as such employment as might be generated by MUDRA loans or platform economy jobs. The latter two sources are precisely what the government claims are not being captured by whatever data on jobs is available.
We have repeatedly stated that government claims that there is not enough ‘good’ data on jobs is simply untenable, for the reasons noted above: recent available employment data all capture jobs that the government claimed were not being captured.
The recently leaked data from the NSSO’s latest labour force survey (PLFS 2017-18), using the same questionnaire and same definitions of employment/unemployment as earlier NSSO surveys on employment should have laid to rest any government claims forever.
What became clear from the NSSO’s 2017-18 data is that actually the jobs situation is even more grim that has been consistently argued. We had argued earlier the overall rate of open unemployment (as opposed to under-employment or disguised unemployment) had risen sharply after 2011-12. That has been proven in the leaked numbers. However, the “believers” prefer the new chief economic advisor’s response:
“People talk about unemployment rate. Debating the unemployment rate misses the point entirely. The key aspect is meaningful employment.”
What the leaked data has shown is that while the open unemployment rate by the usual status was never over 2.6% between 1977-78 and 2011-12, it has now jumped to 6.1% in 2017-18.
This is not entirely surprising as more and more young people have gotten educated in India in the last 10-12 years particularly. Tertiary education enrolment rate (for 18-23 year olds) has risen over this period from 11% in 2006 to 26% in 2016. Gross secondary (classes 9-10) enrolment rate for 15-16 year olds had shot up from 58% in 2010 to 90% in 2016.
The expectation of such youth is for a urban, regular job in either industry or services, not in agriculture. If they have the financial wherewithal to obtain education upto such levels, they can also “afford” to remain unemployed. Poor people, who are also much more poorly educated, have much lower capacity to withstand open unemployment, and hence have lower open unemployment rates.
What the recently leaked data also reveals is that as open unemployment rates increase, more and more people got disheartened, and fall out of the labour force. In other words, they stopped looking for work, even though they were in the working age (15+). The result is that labour force participation rates (LFPR), for all ages, have fallen sharply from 43% in 2004-5 to 39.5% in 2011-12, to 36.9% in 2017-18.
As we will show below, this shows up in the rising numbers of youth who are NEET (not in education, employment or training). This is a potential source of both our demographic dividend, but also of what is looking like a mounting demographic disaster.
Meanwhile, we have been repeatedly told by government economists that there is no jobs crisis. Surjit Bhalla, till recently a member PM’s Economic Advisory Council, keeps repeating that we shouldn’t about slow growth of jobs based on his employment estimates (on January 5, 2019).
However, estimates based on both principal and subsidiary status suggests the following (see below table).
Table 1: Sectoral Employment, Unemployment, Labour Force and NEET (Usual Principal +Subsidiary Status)
Employment and unemployment Estimates 2004-05 2011-12 2015-16 2017-18*
Agriculture 266.2 230.4 225 222.4
Manufacturing 53.1 58.9 48.3 44.1
Non-manufacturing 29.6 55.2 61 64.2
Service 107.5 127.3 140.8 148.4
Total employment 456.5 471.8 475.2 476.9
Unemployed 10.7 10.3 16.5 21.8
Labour force 467.2 482.2 491.7 496.6
NEET (Age group 15-29 years) 70.3 83.9 103.3 115.6
Note: Estimates for the year 2017-18*, are projected figures under the assumption that all else remains unchanged. NEET = Not in education, employment or training. Source: Authors estimation using NSS and LB unit data.
The overall labour force (LF) is not growing at 12 million per annum. Never in India’s history, except 1999-2000 to 2004-5 due to a baby boom in the early 1980s, has the LF grown by 12 million. Instead it had grown by 2.1 million per annum during 2004-05 and 2011-12, and about 2.4 million per annum during post 2011-12 periods. The sharp supposed “fall” in jobs that we find post 2004 is actually on account of a sharp increase in school enrolment.
The volume of open unemployment was almost constant at around 10 million until 2011-12, but it increased to 16.5 million by 2015-16. Increased open unemployment post 2011-12 periods suggests that those in education prior to 2011-12 would start searching for non-agricultural jobs – but did not find them. The latest data suggest that this situation has worsened further by 2017-18.
Worse still, it shows up in a sharp increase in unemployment rate (UR) of the educated (based on our estimates of Annual Survey, Labour Bureau). The UR rose over 2011-12 to 2016 from 0.6 to 2.4% for those with middle education, 1.3% to 3.2% for class 10 pass, 2% to 4.4% for class 12 pass, 4.1 to 8.4% for graduate and 5.3% to 8.5% for post-graduates. Even more worrying, for those with technical education, UR rose for graduates from 6.9% to 11%, post-grads from 5.7 to 7.7% and for vocationally trained from 4.9% to 7.9%. The more educated you are, the more likely you will be unemployed.
Bhalla has argued that “During those seven UPA years [2004-5 to 2011-12] only 10 million jobs were provided or just 1.4 million per annum”. Earlier Bhalla claimed: “…that the lowering of GDP growth for 2004-5 to 2011-12 was entirely expected. Primarily because of the surprise [sic] low employment growth between 2004-5 and 2011-12”.
For 2004-5 to 2011-12 he erroneously claims that NSSO data “reveal” a total job gain of “only 9 million”.
Bhalla seems to believe all kinds of jobs, including in agriculture, are “jobs” to be valued. For an economy at India’s stage of development an increase of workers in agriculture (that took place over 1999-2004) is a structural retrogression – in a direction opposite to the desired one.
Between 2004-5 and 2011-12 the number of workers in agriculture fell sharply, which is good – for the first time in India’s economic history.
Until then, the absolute numbers working in agriculture had increased (even though the share of employment in farming was falling, slowly). Similarly, youth (aged 15-29 years) employed in agriculture fell from 86.8 to 60.9 million (or at the rate of 3 million per annum) between 2004-5 and 2011-12. However, after 2012 youth in agriculture actually increased to 84.8 million till 2015-16 and even more since then (as CMIE data would attest). Bhalla is clearly innocent of such nuances. Job growth is lower in recent years than over 2004 to 2014.
Bhalla’s claim that only 1.4 million jobs were provided during 2004-5 to 2011-12 (or just <10 million total) is facile. Yes, that is true only if you deduct from total job growth in all sectors those leaving agriculture (less agri-workers is a good thing for the workers, agriculture, and economy as a whole). What really matters for India at our stage of development is the growth in non-agricultural jobs. During that period 51.2 million non-agri jobs were created, or 7.3 million per annum.
By contrast, post-2012, only 1.2 million pa (or 4.8 million total) non-agricultural jobs were created until 2015-16, and then 1.75 million (3.5 million total) are likely to have been created (all other things remaining the same) till 2017-18.
What is most worrying is that manufacturing jobs actually fell in absolute terms from 58.9 million in 2011-12 to 48.3 million in 2015-16, a whopping 10.6 million over a mere four-year period. This is consistent with the slowing growth in the Index of Industrial Production (IIP, which consists of manufacturing, mining, electricity).
IIP had risen from 100 in 2004-5 to 172 by 2013-14 (in the 2004-5 series), and from (a base of 100 in 2011-12 in the later series) to 107 in 2013-14, but only rose to 125.3 in 2017-18. Slower industrial production recently is also suggested by other indicators (slower credit offtake, lower plant load factor). Declining manufacturing jobs is indicative of stalled transformation of the Indian economy.
What is tragic is the growing number of educated youths (age 15-29) who are “Not in Employment, Education and Training (NEET)”. This number (which was 70 million in 2004-5, Table 1) increased by 2 million per annum during 2004-5 and 2011-12, but was growing by about 5 million per annum 2011-12 – 2015-16, and if that later trend continued (as there is evidence it has) we estimate it would have increased to 115.6 million in 2017-18.
These NEET and unemployed youths together constitutes the potential labour force, which can be utilised to realise the demographic dividend in India.
Bhalla’s claim: “A large part of the so-called jobs crisis is because of demand for government jobs, not jobs per se” is therefore without foundation.
There is a real crisis. Also, the NEETs have grown by a massive 20 million in just four years (2011-12 to 2015-16). Plus there is the 10 million actual increase in the LF. In other words, just over 4 years, India should have created at least 7.5 million new non-agri jobs each year (which India had managed to create over 2004-5 to 2011-12); it actually created only 2.2 million. This is not counting the new non-agri jobs needed for agricultural workers wanting to leave agriculture; this number fell as construction growth fell sharply in the last few years.
If the government is not willing to recognise a jobs problem it is unlikely to do very much about it – and continue to keep relying upon EPFO data (inadequate as it is) and MUDRA loans to keep informing us that there is no jobs crisis.
It’s not surprising that the NDA-II’s budget speech did not mention “jobs” once.
Prophet Muhammad’s Lessons in Leadership
By John Adair
Trust being lost, all the social intercourse of men is brought to naught – Livy (Roman Historian)
During his hidden years in Mecca working with merchant-caravans, probably as a caravan leader, Muhammad acquired a new name: al-Amin, the Trustworthy One. The same root, incidentally, gives the English word amen, often used at the end of prayers, an expression of hearty approval. We can only guess What it was about the character or conduct of Muhammad that gave rise to this attractive sobriquet, but there is a clue. In 622 CE, while making ready for his migration from Mecca, Muhammad – in danger of his life – delayed long enough to dispose of some moneys that had been deposited at his house.
For centuries the whole life of Mecca centered on its caravan trade. Everyone in Mecca, rich and poor alike, including women landholders (of whom there were a number), was anxious to have a stake in this lucrative business. The powerful families grew richer and more in?uential with each annual expedition; and the poorer families saved every available dinar in order to share in these commercial ventures. The merchants of Mecca formed themselves into a syndicate, pooling their capital to equip the caravan, and then shared proportionately in the returns from their joint enterprise. Usually a single person would be asked to constitute himself the banker for the occasion, receiving deposits from everyone interested in a particular expedition, and then administer the funds as economically as possible. Most probably it was Muhammad’s consistency and scrupulous honesty in this role that earned him his reputation for trustworthiness.
A young widow in Mecca by the name of Khadija bint Khuwaylid more than once entrusted her investment money interest in a caravan into the keeping of one of her cousins – Muhammad. She was so impressed by him professionally, and attracted to him personally, that following a custom allowed among the Arabs – the sexes were much more equal than in other societies – she sent him a proposal of marriage which included the words: ‘0 son of my uncle’ [Arabic has no word for cousin], she wrote in her letter, ‘I like you because of our relationship and your high reputation among your people, your trustworthiness and good character and truthfulness.’
Muhammad accepted her proposal. It was one of the wisest decisions he made. She was his only wife for 25 years until her death (620 CE), she bore him Fatima and sons (none survived) and other daughters. And she was the ?rst person to believe in Muhammad’s prophethood.
No man is a prophet in his own land, said a proverb already ancient in Muhammad’s day. He would know the truth of it, for he had to endure years of rejection and even hostility from most of his fellow townsfolk. Through all these trials and tribulations in Mecca, Khadija was Muhammad’s chief stay and support. She knew her man and believed him as only a woman in love can. Perhaps these words of the French historian and political scientist Alexis de Tocqueville about his wife may well express what Muhammad felt about his wife: ‘She softens, calms and strengthens me in difficulties which disturb me but leave her serene.’
Clearly, then, Muhammad was a man with a reputation for integrity. That word, from the Latin integer whole, is especially appropriate for Muhammad as far as Muslims are concerned, for in its primary meaning integrity implies unity that indicates interdependence of the parts and completeness and perfection of the whole. Human beings are like stones, some Muslims say, and Muhammad is as the only ruby among them.
Honesty means a refusal to lie, steal or cheat in any way. Integrity goes a mile beyond honesty: it implies trustworthiness and incorruptibility to a degree that one is incapable of being false to a trust, responsibility or pledge. A leader with integrity is like the English poet William Wordsworth’s ‘Happy Warrior’:
Who comprehends his trust, and to the same
Keeps faithful, with singleness of aim;
And therefore does not stop, nor lie in wait
For wealth or honour, or for worldly state.
This integrity extends through the entireness or wholeness of the character. It is found in small matters as well as great, for allegiance to truth is tested as much by small things as by those that are more important.
Notice the centrality of the value of truth, as evidenced by a ?rm adherence to truth in all things – in the concept of integrity. Khadija, you recall, mentioned Muhammad’s ‘truthfulness’ – that he habitually spoke the truth – as well as his ‘trustworthiness’, but in fact these two virtues go hand in hand. If you tell the truth, people will trust you; if you lie and the other person ?nds out, then trust will be diminished if not lost for ever.
Why does truth or veracity, honesty and high principle, matter in a leader? The reason is simple. Leaders who are true, and always speak the truth, create trust. And trust is vital in all human relations, professional or private.
You can see why Muhammad insisted upon integrity in those who were chosen to be leaders in the Umma, the growing Muslim community. There was to be no place for any form of bribery or corruption: not that this prohibition was – or is – easy, for man is ‘Violent… in his love of wealth’ (Quran 100:8).
I will stand surety for Paradise if you save yourself from six things: telling untruths, violating promises, dishonouring trust, being unchaste in thought and act, striking the ?rst blow, taking what is bad and unlawful. Prophet Muhammad (s)
Perhaps of all Muhammad’s successors it was the second caliph, Umar, who is the chief exemplar of integrity in Islam. Although he lacked Muhammad’s humour and charm, Umar matched him in scrupulous honesty and uprightness in matters ?nancial, his passion for impartial justice and his adherence to the simple, open and approachable Bedouin style of leadership. Numani, the authoritative biographer of Umar, emphasizes his unbending integrity:
Here, we must note that all the Caliph’s efforts in this regard would have counted for little if he had not himself led by example. He stressed repeatedly that, as regards the Law, he stood on an equal footing with any other individual. He claimed no special privileges or exemptions as caliph. He proclaimed, instead, that his powers were limited and his exercise of them subject to scrutiny and criticism.
Regarding public funds, Umar said: ‘I have no greater right on your money [ie public funds] than the guardian of an orphan has on that orphan’s property. If I am wealthy, I shall not take anything. If I am needy, I shall take for my maintenance according to usage. You people – you have many rights on me which you should demand of me. One of those rights is that I should not collect revenues and spoils of war unlawfully; the second is that the revenues and spoils of war that come into my possession should not be spent unlawfully; another is that I should increase your salaries and protect the frontiers, and that I should not cast you into unnecessary perils.’
For believers, God has self-evidently many qualities or attributes, or ‘names’ as they are called in the Islamic tradition. Encouraged by the Quran (Q7:180; Q17:110; Q20:8), Muslims selected 99 of these attributes of God describing this perfection, from the Quran and traditions. Referred to as ‘the most beautiful names of God’, they describe a range of characteristics that balance the power of God (the Creator, the Sovereign and the All- Knowing) with His love and mercy (the All-Loving, the Most Gracious and the All-Forgiving). The names are frequently memorized and used in prayers. One name that has been hidden by God is Ism Allah al-a’zam, ‘The Greatest Name of Allah’. Yet all this unfathomably rich diversity is encompassed in an essential unity: ‘Say: He is Allah, the One…’
The Pleasures of Seeking Knowledge
By Ibrahim Bijli Syed
The rise of Muslims to the zenith of civilization in a period of four decades was based on lslam’semphasis on learning. This is obvious when one takes a look at the Qur’an and the traditions of Prophet Muhammad which are filled with references to learning, education, observation, and the use of reason. The very first verse of the Qur’an revealed to the Prophet of Islam on the night of 27th of Ramadan in 611 AD reads:
“Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created man from a clot. Recite: And thy Lord is the Most Generous Who taught by the pen, taught man that which he knew not.” (Quran, 96:1-5)
“And they shall say had we but listened or used reason, we would not be among the inmates of the burning fire.” (Quran, 67:10)
“Are those who have knowledge and those who have no knowledge alike? Only the men of understanding are mindful. ” (Quran, 39:9)
The Qur’an encourages people towards scientific research:.
“And whoso brings the truth and believes therein such are the dutiful.” (Quran, 39:33)
Every Muslim man’s and every Muslim woman’s prayer should be:
“My Lord! Enrich me with knowledge..” (Quran, 20:114)
The pursuit of knowledge and the use of reason, based on sense and observation is made obligatory on all believers.
The following traditions of the Prophet supplement the foregoing teachings of the Qur’an in the following way:
Seek knowledge “even though it be in China.”
“The acquisition of knowledge is compulsory for every Muslim, whether male or female.”
“The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr.”
“Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave.”
“God has revealed to me, ‘Whoever walks in the pursuit of knowledge I facilitate for him the way to heaven.’
“The best form of worship is the pursuit of knowledge.”
“Scholars should endeavour to spread knowledge and provide education to people who have been deprived of it. For, where knowledge is hidden it disappears.”
Someone asked the Prophet: “Who is the biggest scholar?” He replied: “He who is constantly trying to learn from others, for a scholar is ever hungry for more knowledge.”
“Seek knowledge and wisdom, or whatever the vessel from which it flows, you will never be the loser.”
“Contemplating deeply for one hour (with sincerity) is better than 70 years of (mechanical) worship.”
“To listen to the words of the learned and to instill unto others the lessons of science is better than religious exercises.”
“Acquire knowledge: it enables its possessor to distinguish right from the wrong, it lights the way to heaven; it is our friend in the desert, our society in solitude, our companion when friendless – it guides us to happiness; it sustains us in misery; it is an ornament among friends and an armor against enemies.”
The Islamic Empire for more than 1,000 years remained the most advanced civilization in the world. The main reasons for this was that Islam stressed the importance and respect of learning, forbade destruction, cultivated a respect for authority, discipline, and tolerance for other religions. The teachings of Qur’an and Sunnah inspired many Muslims to their accomplishments in science and medicine.
By the tenth century their zeal and enthusiasms for learning resulted in all essential Greek medical and scientific writings being translated into Arabic in Damascus, Cairo, and Baghdad. Arabic became the international language of learning and diplomacy. The center of scientific knowledge and activity shifted eastward, and Baghdad emerged as the capitol of the scientific world. The Muslims became scientific innovators with originality and productivity.
For example Islamic medicine is one of the most famous and best known facets of Islamic civilization in which the Muslims excelled. The Muslims were the great torchbearers of international scientific research. Some of the best and most eloquent praises of science came from the pens of Muslim scientists who considered their work to be acts of worship. The same motives led to the establishment of Al-Azhar (800 AD) the first university in the world. They hit the “source ball of knowledge” over the fence to Europe. In the words of Campbell, “The European medical system is Arabian not only in origin but also in its structure. The Arabs are the intellectual forbearers of the Europeans.”
Learning is a natural pleasure. This pleasure is inborn and instinctive. The pleasure of learning is one of the essential pleasures of the human race. Without learning, survival itself is threatened.
The process of learning starts right after birth. It is true that babies who can barely talk investigate problems with all the zeal and excitement of explorers, make discoveries with the passion and absorption of dedicated scientists. At the end of each successful investigation, one can see on the tiny face an expression of innocent and pure heartfelt pleasure. The process of physical growth stops when a boy or girl reaches puberty that is with the onset of menarche in the girls and with the change in the voice and growth of moustache and beard in boys. After puberty it is impossible to increase the height both in boys and girls.
On the other hand the mental faculties grow from birth until death. At some point in our lifetime, the physical body becomes sick or ill and gradually dies; even the emotions become duller. But the mind continues to live, and even grows more lively and active, enjoys itself more, works and plays with more expansion and delight. I have seen grandparents obtaining Bachelors, Masters and Ph. D. degrees at the ages of 70, 80 or 90.
There are many examples in the history of Art, Music and Science, of both men and women who significantly contributed and lead mentally productive lives at their ripe old ages. Learning extends our lives into new dimensions. It is cumulative. Instead of diminishing in time, like health and strength, its dividends go on increasing, provided one continues to learn throughout life and integrate the thoughts and make learning harmonious. One should make it a point to learn at least one piece of new information each day.
The pleasure of learning is not confined to learning from textbooks, which are too often tedious. But it does include learning from book magazines (periodicals), newspapers, movies, television, radio and traveling.
The Importance of Understanding Attributes of Allah
By Naseer Ahmed
Allah is the sole source of all knowledge of what is right and what is wrong or what is moral and what is immoral. If we wish to master this knowledge perfectly, it is essential that we orient ourselves perfectly to receive this knowledge. The orientation is by gaining a perfect understanding of the nature of Allah or of all His attributes. Misunderstanding of any attribute leads to a wrong understanding of His Book, of right and wrong, and this is the way Satan misleads and deprives us of becoming perfect Muslim. The text of the Quran is preserved and protected from corruption but not the understanding of it.
This is not about memorising the 99 names of Allah but knowing the 99 attributes of Allah or of fully comprehending the nature or zaat of Allah. The attributes of Allah are best understood by a person who has understood the Quran without a single contradiction and without treating any verse as abrogated. Such a person has completely and perfectly understood the nature of Allah.
Islamic scholars have no problem with the contradictions their interpretations create because they think that Allah is free to contradict Himself because “He does what He wills” and this is proof of His omnipotence that he is not bound by any rule. By creating this misunderstanding of Allah’s attribute of His Will and Omnipotence, Satan has succeeded in making people worship the attribute of ‘whimsicalness’ which is Satan’s attribute and not Allah’s.
Allah certainly does what He wills but He has willed the rule of law and the law of perfect causality and He has also willed that he will never change His ways or change His command/word once it is issued. The Sign that the Qur’an is from Allah is that it is a Book without a single contradiction and if you are given a Book saying that it is from Allah and if that Book has even a single contradiction, throw it into the face of Satan because such a Book cannot be from Allah. While the Book is from Allah, our scholars, by their misinterpretations which create contradictions, have made it into a Book from Satan!
The Quran is a simple Book, easy to understand and without crookedness. All that is required is that we take its straight forward literal meaning. It is scholarship that puts a spin on every verse and misinterprets which is why the hadith which says that the scholars will be among the foremost who will be flung into Hell sounds true. The scholars put their spin because they misunderstand the attributes of Allah.
Take the attribute of justice. Is Allah just if those born into “Muslim” families have an edge over those born into families that practice polytheism? Some of our revered scholars of the past have said that some people are predestined to go to Heaven, while others are predestined to go to Hell or Allah has created some for Heaven and others for Hell. This obviously sounds whimsical and arbitrary which they explain away by saying “Allah wills what He wills”. They get both the attributes wrong.
The answer any reasonable person will give is that justice demands that persons born into any faith should have an equal chance of gaining Heaven/Hell, but Muslims will not voice this opinion, because it is drilled into their heads that non-Muslims are Kafir and they will all go to Hell, and what they see is that people born into a faith, remain in the same faith. Those who change their faith are a small number.
Those who seek an unambiguous answer from the Quran on this question, will find an answer, but those who firmly believe otherwise, will remain blind and deaf to the clear answer. This is because we have not even learnt to trust the word of Allah and read it without our mind cluttered with pre-conceived notions. The reading therefore does not benefit us. For more on the subject, read:
The Muslims, in general, are far from correctly comprehending the most important attributes of Allah. They may worship only one God, but this God is partial to them, which is not an attribute of the Rabb-ul-Alameen who is Al ‘Adl or perfectly just, but the attribute of the gods of the polytheists. So, how can a polytheist be at a disadvantage vis-à-vis a Muslim, whose concept of his God is defective to the extent that he attributes to Allah, the same quality of partiality, which is what makes the many gods of the polytheists so very attractive to them?
If the Muslims correctly understand this attribute, they will then know that they are not in any way superior to any other people except by virtue of their good deeds. Their attitude to the ‘other’ changes dramatically for the better. We are then open to what is good in them and appreciate it.
If there was no Hell would the world have been a better place? Allah is the epitome of morality or what maximizes good. Hell is also a part of His Mercy therefore without which there would have been more oppression, injustice and misery in this world. The description of Hell Fire in the Quran is that it is a great continuous torment.
(4:56) The Kafaru, We shall soon cast into the Fire: as often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty: for Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.
If the warning of Punishment in Hell wasn’t a Mercy, Allah wouldn’t have said:
(55:37) When the sky is rent asunder, and it becomes red like ointment:
(38) Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?
Our capacity for both good and evil is dependent upon the autonomy or free will that Allah has granted us. Without autonomy, we would have been like animals without choice for either good or evil and lived in accordance with our instincts. There would have been no need for either Heaven or Hell then. The question then is:
Was Allah Unjust in Creating Adam and Favouring His Progeny Over All His Creation?
If the Hell had been made less painful, then the Heaven would have been made less pleasant, and our autonomy curtailed to decrease our potential for both good and evil. Allah finds the perfect balance. There is both infinite divine wisdom and mercy in the creation of Hell and making it what it is, without which there wouldn’t have been Heaven either, and the freedom to choose our path. Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?