Making deliberate choices this new year

So, what does it mean to have a new year? Isn’t the change just a figment of our collective imagination? Otherwise, the change from Dec 31 to Jan 1 is not much different from the change between Dec 30 and Dec 31. Yet Jan 1 is special because we consider it to be so.

We often learn its significance sub-consciously from our society, on how to feel and act about the new year. These feelings come almost involuntarily at the end of each year (thanks in part to the corporate media and school vacations).

The point here is not to question the significance of the new year, but to take the new year deliberately, to transform its meaning and make conscious choices about what to make of it.

Let’s make this year a special year, a year of deliberate choices. Not just any choices, but deliberate choices with a critically/spiritually conscious perspective and goals. Let's seek deeper and lasting awareness, beauty, and peace. Let's devote ourselves in the pursuits of truth and justice, individually and collectively. And let's transcend the narratives and preoccupations of our ego to connect to the heart of humanity and the essence of reality. Let's define our new year's resolutions in terms of revolutions!

Engaging Raj Patel's "The Value of Nothing"

I have not read Raj Patel's latest book yet, except for parts of its first chapter. Just read John Gray's review. I thought Gray raises an important question which remains an issue for materialist ideologies/movements fighting against materialism/capitalism. I touched upon this in a previous post, here. Yet, based on my previous reading and listening to Raj's work, I have a feeling that Gray might have under-appreciated Raj's call for a substantial change in how we value things and live our life; Gray may have read Raj through the lens of socialist/labor-rights/progressive movements that Raj is closed to in his activism, instead of reading the book on its own merit. But I can be wrong too.

On a side note, do check out a promotional video of the book that Raj has published online.

Excerpts:

Review: The Value of Nothing by Raj Patel
By John Gray, The Observer, December 13, 2009
Source

"Part of the problem is the belief that price and value are for most purposes one and the same. This equation makes it possible for them to develop impressive-looking mathematical models of the economy, but it involves a huge oversimplification of reality. As Raj Patel explains in this penetrating and admirably concise guide to the follies of market fundamentalism, the notion that the value of a good is its price obscures the complexity of markets and of human beings. Theories of efficient markets take the shifting abstractions generated by the price mechanism as actually existing entities but, as Patel puts it, using one of many vivid metaphors that stud his argument, this is like being in the simulated world of The Matrix, surrounded by "a digital rain of symbols and signs".

The seeming precision of the computer screen suggests that something substantial is being measured and exchanged, when in fact what is being traded are virtual assets whose relations with actual resources are tangled and hidden..."
...

"Contrary to the claims of economists, the belief that price equals value is not science, an accurate representation of the world, but ideology – a way of obfuscating the world."
...

"Much of what passes as economics is ideology and ideology only works if those who produce it also believe in it. The difficulty of the present situation comes from the fact that while few any longer believe in the free market, no one has an alternative to it that is able to command widespread support. Predictably, the financial storm has jolted moribund Marxist theories back into a semblance of life..."
...

"A passionate activist, he believes problems of resource scarcity are man-made and can always be solved by fairer distribution. However, the growth-oriented lifestyle of rich countries is not unsustainable because it is unjust; it is unsustainable because the Earth's resources are unalterably finite. It may be true that the imbalance between human demands and the environment could be diminished if enough people rejected material affluence as their main goal in life. But this is an extremely nebulous possibility and one that highlights the deepest difficulty for Patel's analysis.

Oscar Wilde may have been right that people know the price of everything and the value of nothing, a remark Patel cites at the start of his book, and which gives him its title. But what is value if it is not price? It is telling that when trying to flesh out a non-market account, Patel turns to religion, in this case Buddhism. The Buddhist tradition gives him what he needs – an understanding of human wellbeing that does not centre round the satisfaction of wants. Like the ancient European Stoic and Epicurean philosophies, Buddhism proposes that happiness lies in shrinking the self – in giving up our wants, rather than forever chasing after them. It is a thought that occurs to many well-off people from time to time, but it is hard to imagine large numbers of people ever acting on it.

Theories of value that focus on curbing desire run up against the demand for self-realisation, which is one of the strongest impulses in modern life. To be sure, the pursuit of self-realisation does not often result in happiness. But is it happiness that most people are pursuing? Or is it stimulus and excitement? In the Himalayan Buddhist kingdom of Bhutan, Patel informs the reader, the introduction of satellite television has been followed by a crime wave. He seems to think this fact somehow strengthens his argument. But what it tells us is that no culture can now resist the dangerous charms of a life spent in insatiable desire."

The Love Connection

Something that's long known to exist in all kinds of affectionate relationships, science is finally opening itself to this area of research:

from NPR (May 21, 2009):

The Love Study

On a bright spring day, Schlitz is leading Teena and J.D. Miller down a path to the laboratory at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, north of San Francisco. Schlitz is the president of the institute, which conducts research on consciousness and spirituality. The Millers have been married a decade and their affection is palpable — making them perfect for the so-called Love Study.

Schlitz takes Teena into an isolated room, where no sound can come in or go out. Teena settles into a deep armchair as Schlitz attaches electrodes to her right hand.

"This is measuring blood flow in your thumb, and this is your skin conductance activity," the researcher explains. "So basically both of these are measures of your unconscious nervous system."

Schlitz locks Teena into the electromagnetically shielded chamber, then ushers J.D. into another isolated room with a closed-circuit television. She explains that the screen will go on and off. And at random intervals, Teena's image will appear on the screen for 10 seconds.

"And so during the times when you see her," she instructs, "it's your opportunity to think about sending loving, compassionate intention."

As the session begins, Dean Radin, a senior scientist here, watches as a computer shows changes in J.D.'s blood pressure and perspiration. When J.D. sees the image of his wife, the steady lines suddenly jump and become ragged. The question is: Will Teena's nervous system follow suit?

"Notice how here … see, there's a change in the blood volume," says Radin, pointing to a screen charting Teena's measurements. "A sudden change like that is sometimes associated with an orienting response. If you suddenly hear somebody whispering in your ear, and there's nobody around, you have this sense of what? What was that? That's more or less what we're seeing in the physiology."

An hour later, Radin displays Teena's graph, which shows a flat line during the times her husband was not staring at her image, but when her husband began to stare at her, she stopped relaxing and became "aroused" within about two seconds.

After running 36 couples through this test, the researchers found that when one person focused his thoughts on his partner, the partner's blood flow and perspiration dramatically changed within two seconds. The odds of this happening by chance were 1 in 11,000. Three dozen double blind, randomized studies by such institutions as the University of Washington and the University of Edinburgh have reported similar results.

The 'Quantum Entanglement' Of Love

So how do you explain this? No one really knows. But Radin and a few others think that a theory known as "quantum entanglement" may offer some clues.

Here's how it works. Once two particles have interacted, if you separate them, even by miles, they behave as if they're still connected. So far, this has only been demonstrated on the subatomic level.

But Radin wonders: Could people in close relationships — couples, siblings, parent and child — also be "entangled"? Not just emotionally, and psychologically — but also physically?

"If it is true that entanglement actually persists, by means of which we don't understand," he says, "if they are physically entangled, you should be able to separate them, poke one, and see the other one flinch."

This idea — that we may be connected at some molecular level — echoes the words of mystics down the ages. And it appeals to some scientists.

But it infuriates others — like Columbia University's Sloan. The underlying idea is wrong, he says. Entanglement just doesn't work this way.

"Physicists are very clear that the relationship is purely correlational and not causal," Sloan says. "There is nothing causal about quantum entanglement. It's good to be open-minded, but not so open-minded that your brains fall out."

Radin and others agree that that's what science says right now. But they say these findings eventually have to be explained somehow.

Horr: A Free Person

Horr illuminates the path to liberation of the self from the bondage of false ideologies and oppressive systems.

Excerpts from Dr. Ali Shariati's piece entitled "Horr" (source):

"Horr was the name of one of the high-ranking commanders of the army of Omar-e-Sad who faced the grandson of the Prophet of Islam, Hussain-ebn-Ali, with orders from Yazeed-ebn-Muawiah to either get Hussain's allegiance for his corrupt Khalifat, or kill Hussain and all his friends. It was Horr and his army who first faced Imam Hussein, and then kept them under siege, preventing them from getting water.

On the day of Ashoura, Horr made a huge decision. Right before the battle started, he left his position and the army he was commanding, and joined Imam Hussein, and was the first to be killed in the way of Allah, by the army he used to be a commander of just a few hours earlier. The name "Horr" means free, freeborn, noble, freeman.
...

"[This] story is about a "choice", the most important manifestation of the meaning of human being. But what kind of choice? We are all faced with several choices in our everyday life: career, friend, wife, house, major.. But in this story, the choice is much more difficult: the good and the evil. And even so, not from a philosophical, scientific, or theological perspective. Instead, the choice here is between the truthful and the deceiving religion, between the just and unjust politics, with life being the price to pay.

"Although Horr has played a unique role in the history, the essence of his role is not just confined to himself. The meaning of his action, in fact, includes all human-beings, and indeed defines "humanity". It is what distinguishes the human-beings from other creatures, underlining the responsibility of man with respect to God, people, and himself. And Horr has not played this with words and concepts, but with love and blood. If one grasps the depth of this saying from Imam Sadegh(AS) that "All days are Ashoura, and all places are Karbala, and all months are Moharam" one readily feels the extension: "and all human-beings are Horr!"

Our history, starting from Habil and Ghabil [Abel and Cain], is the manifestation of the eternal conflict between the two poles of God and Satan, though in each period of time these two poles have disguised differently. Therefore, in each period of time, every human-being finds himself just in the same position as Horr did: alone, in the middle, hesitating, between the same two armies. On the one side, the commander of the army of evil shouts on his soldiers: "O Army of God! attack!" and on the other side, an Imam, with a voice echoing throughout the history asks -and not commands- "Is there anybody who wishes to assist me?" and you, the man, should choose.

It is by this choice that you become human. Before this choice you are nothing, you are just an existence without essence, you are standing in the middle. Thus, the man who has found "existence" through birth, finds "essence" through choice. It is by this choice, that the creation of man completes, and this is exactly when the man feels this heavy burden on his shoulders and finds himself alone, as God and the nature have left him on his own on this dangerous decision.
...

"Now we can evaluate our hero, we can feel what a long journey he has gone through in what a short time, to change him from a Yazidian Horr, to a Husseinian Horr. If he stays with the army of Yazid, his world is guaranteed, and if he joins the small army of Hussain, his death is eminent. It is the morning of the day of Ashoura, and although the battle has not yet started in the fields, Horr realizes that the opportunity would not last. Time goes by fast, and the moments count. The storm has already started within him.

From the beginning, Horr was hoping that the events would not lead to war, but now war seems to be unavoidable. Human-beings have limited capability in tolerating shame and scorn, except for those who are genius in this respect and can tolerate disgrace unlimitedly. Horr never had thought that being an "employee" of the government of Yazid would mean collaborating in Yazid's criminal acts. For him his job was just a source of income without having anything to do with politics or his religion.

Horr now realizes that adding his position with his religion is impossible. Thus, hopelessly and as a last resort he talks with the commander of the Army (Omar-ebn-Sa'd) who like himself is reluctant to get in a war and has accepted the mission to become the governor of the province of Ray and Gorgan. What would then be better than coming up with some sort of a solution without getting involved in the blood of the grandson of the Prophet and his family.

Horr and Omar-ebn-Sa'd both have come all the way from the palace of Yazid to Karbala together and they share the same status and social class. Horr asks Omar:

"Can't you find a peaceful solution for this situation?"

"You know that if it had been up to me I would have done as what you propose, but your master Obeid-Allah-Ziyad did not accept a peaceful resolution!"

"So are you going to fight with this man (Hussein)?"

"Yes, by God, I will fight a battle the least consequence of which will be separated heads and broken arms!"

Now, it is evident that no longer can he play games with his religion. Now, the two separate their paths.

For Horr, Yazid's army of tens of thousand is now nothing more than a bunch of faces, without meaning. A crowd of men without selves, a group of people without hearts, those who shout but don't know why, fight but don't know for whom. Now the Jesus of love and conscience cures a blind and resurrects a dead, creating a martyr from a murderer. In a journey it is not enough to ask for the destination, but one should also ask from the origin. Thus, the length of Horr's journey becomes evident when one realizes from where he started, and to where he ended, all in half-a day's time. In his emigration from Satan to Allah , Horr did not study philosophy or theology, nor did he attend any lectures or schools. He just changed his direction, and it is in fact this "direction" which gives meaning to everything: art, science, literature, religion, prayers, hajj, Mohammad, Ali...

Having started his journey, and riding his horse, he slowly leaves his Army toward Hussain. Muhajer-ebn-Ous, who sees him agitated and worried asks:

"Whats wrong with you Horr? I am puzzled by your case, by God if I were asked about the bravest man in our army I wouldn't hesitate to mention your name, and now you are so disturbed and worried?"

"I find myself between the Hell and the Heaven, and I have to select between them, and by God I will not choose but Heaven, even if I were cut to pieces or burnt to ashes!"

The creation of Horr was completed and the fire of doubt has led him to the verity of certitude. He slowly approaches the camp of Hussain, and as he gets closer he hangs his boots from his neck, and keeps his armor down (as a sign of remorse)

"I am the one who closed your path O Hussein" He didnt accept Hussein's invitation to rest for a while..

"Is there a repentance for me?" He can't wait any longer, he returns to the front and attacks the army of Omar with the most severe and bitter words, letting his ex-army and ex-commander know that he is no longer a slave, he is free, he is "Horr".

Omar-ebn-Sa'd, his ex-commander, responds by throwing an arrow and yelling

"Be witness and let Amir-ol-momenin know that I was the one to throw the first arrow at the army of Hussain!

And this was how the battle of Karbala started.........
...

"[Horr] has been named by his mother, "Horr", as if she has been able to foresee the sensitive role his son is going to play. And thus, when the Imam of freedom attends his bloody body, just before his death, tells him: "O Horr! God bless you! You are free both in this world and in the world to come, just like what your mother called you!"
...

Horr is also spelled as Hurr in texts.

KARBALA: THE VOICE OF ISLAMIC CONSCIENCE

In his famous speech, On the Plight of the Oppressed People, Dr. Ali Shariati argues that Islam came as a challenge to the oppressive status quo of the time. But, after the death of the Prophet Mohammad (s), Islam suffered distortion and corruption like the messages of the previous Prophets. Islam was used to enslave helpless people for personal interests and glory of tribal dynasties of Ummayads and Abbasids and others. As Shariati puts it, “I saw the swords which were engraved with verses on holy war. I saw the places for worship. I saw those who prayed. I saw the saintly faces who spoke in the name of spiritual leadership, the Caliphs, and the preservation of the Prophet's traditions. Nevertheless, collectively, they took us into slavery!”

A Reason for Hope

Despite this deviation, in this and other writings, Shariati is optimistic that Islam can still emancipate the struggling humanity from the servitude of Pharaohs of the modern age because its universal message has survived not only in the text but also through the exemplary lives and sacrifices of Ali and Fatima, their children Zainab and Hussain, and Prophet’s companions Abu Zarr and Bilal. Below, I look at how the great sacrifice that Imam Hussain and Syeda Zainab gave on the plains of Karbala (Iraq) became the conscience of Islam.

As soon as Yazid assumed the seat of Caliphate after his father’s death, he demanded that Imam Hussain do his bai’at, that is, pay allegiance to him. Yazid was a tyrant, who was personally corrupt and openly mocked Islam. "If this Ummah is to be tried with a shepherd such as Yazid, then farewell to Islam," Imam Hussain declared at this point. Imam Hussain who was the inheritor of the knowledge and piety of the Prophet and the leader of the Ummah, his allegiance would have blurred the distinction between the true Islam and falsehood. Islam would have become a fatalistic ideology serving the rule of the Ummayads. But Imam Hussain’s response to Yazid’s demand for bai’at became the universal message for all the followers of truth and justice, when he said, ‘Someone like me cannot do a bai’at of someone like him’ (‘mujh jesa, yazid jese kii bai’at nahi kar sakta’), and ‘It is better to die on feet than to live on knees’ (‘zillat kii zindagi se izzat kii maut behtar hai’).

In a will Imam Hussain made before departing from Makkah, he declared: “Indeed, I have not risen up to do mischief, neither as an adventurer, nor to cause corruption and tyranny. I have risen up solely to seek the reform of the Ummah of my grandfather. I want to command what is good and stop what is wrong, and (in this) I follow the conduct of my grandfather and my father, Ali ibn Abi Talib.” Imam Hussain was martyred along with more than 70 companions in Karbala on 10th of Muharram (Ashura) in 61 A.H/ 680 C.E.

After Imam Hussain, his sister Syeda Zainab carried forward his message and spoke in the courts of Kufa and Damascus with such courage and eloquence that reminded people of the eloquence and courage of her mother, Fatima, and father, Ali.

Development of a Movement

Imam Hussain’s revolt was the first one of its kind in the Islamic history. It marked a clear distinction between the true Islam and falsehood, and inspired many movements in the later generations against the Umayyads and Abbasids and other tribal dynasties. Imam Hussain’s revolt became the conscience of Islam that challenged any fatalistic justifications for the tyranny of Yazid and his likes for all times and places.

An equally significant influence of this great sacrifice was the development of a cultural movement within Islam. Analytically separate, but in reality, the political and the cultural are the two facets of the same movement. This cultural movement started with the commemorations of the tragedy of Karbala that continue to this day. Each year, in the month of Muharram, hundreds of thousands of followers and admirers of Hussain come together and remember the great sacrifice. They narrate the tragic accounts and engage in public mourning. Imam Hussain’s struggle is recollected as an archetype movement about the eternal struggle of truth against falsehood in which blood triumphed over sword. These commemorations claim to represent an alternative history of Islam following the demise of the Prophet and a commitment to preserve Islam’s true message through recounting the sacrifices of the noble household of the Prophet.

Over the passage of more than a millennium, a discourse has evolved out of this cultural movement, in prose and poetry, oral as well as written forms, and through an array of symbols and images in different colors in different parts of the world. This is the discourse of human conscience, resistance, and universal justice developed by the survivors of Karbala, Shia Imams, historians, poets, mystics, reformers, and devotees among Shias, Sunnis, and even Non Muslims.

Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti, the Sufi preacher from South Asia, sees Hussain as the savior of Islam:

Shah ast Hussain, Badshah ast Hussain
Deen ast Hussain, Deen Panah ast Hussain
Sar dad, na dad dast, dar dast-e-yazeed
Haqaa key binaey La ila ast Hussain

Hussain is the Master, Hussain is the King
Hussain is Faith, Hussain is Refuge for the Faith
He gave his head but not his hand in Yazid’s hand
Verily Hussain is the foundation of La’Illah.

Muhammad Ali Jauhar, a Sunni reformer and a central figure in the Khilafat Movement in the first half of the twentieth century sees Hussain’s movement in this light:

Haqq o batil ki hai paikar hameha jari
Jo na batil se daren hain vahi Shi’an-e Hussain

The war between truth and falsehood is eternal
Those who are not frightened by falsehood are the partisans of Hussain

At another place, he presents his inspiration from Karbala in these terms:

Qatl-e Hussain asl men marg-e Yazid hai
Islam zinda hota hai har Karbala ke baad

In reality the murder of Hussain is the death of Yazid
Islam is resurrected after every Karbala

Faiz Ahmed Faiz, one of the prominent figures of the Progressive Writers Association (PWA), a literary movement for social justice in South Asia, takes inspiration from Imam Hussain’s sacrifice in these words:

(from a marsiya Faiz wrote)

Jo zulm peh la’nat na kare, aap la’een hai
Jo jabar ka munkir nahi, woh munkire deen hai

He is cursed who imprecates not the oppression
By not negating fatalism/suppression, he negates the religion

Over time these commemoration gatherings have developed some ritualistic aspects that may not be mindful of the underlying purpose of these gatherings. These gatherings nonetheless have retained the message of justice and resistance that serves as a conscience of Islam, and have provided the resource for political resistance against tyrannies in different parts of the world. This should be clear from the symbolic resource that the reformers in South Asia find in the message of Karbala. The Iranian Revolution in 1979 is another example.

These commemorations are much richer than what they appear to the outsiders in media and public observations. Without the underlying meaning, these commemorations would appear as merely a ritualistic street processions. But, for those who understand their purpose and message, these gatherings continue to inspire them and shape their subjectivities and worldview. These commemorations continue to influence the cultural discourse of the Muslim community. It is for this reason that tyrant regimes, like that of Saddam Hussein, wanted to suppress these gatherings. These tyrants, however, always failed due to the devotion and sacrifices of the followers and bearers of this movement over the last 1400 years.

Given its universal character and message, this movement is seen by the followers as the continuation of the struggles of all prophets, from the time of Adam to Mohammad (peace be upon them all). And for the same reason, it is understood as the conscience of all humanity. It is in this light that the mourners recite Ziyarat-e-Waritha (also spelled as, Ziarat-e- Warisa) at the end of each commemoration gathering, in which, with moving sentiments, they describe and testify the greatness of Imam Hussain’s sacrifice for the cause of Allah and make solemn pledge of their support for Imam’s mission:

An excerpt from Ziyarat-e-Waritha:

"Peace be upon you,
O inheritor of Adam, the chosen one of Allah
Peace be upon you,
O inheritor of Nuh, the prophet of Allah
Peace be upon you,
O inheritor of Ibrahim, the beloved friend of Allah
Peace be upon you,
O inheritor of Moosa, who received direct communication from Allah
Peace be upon you,
O inheritor of Muhammad, the beloved friend of Allah
Peace be upon you,
O inheritor of Ali, the commander of the faithful, and beloved of Allah
Peace be upon you,
O son of Muhammad, the chosen,
Peace be upon you,
O son of Ali, the one accepted by Allah,
Peace be upon you,
O son of Fatimah, leader of women in the world,
Peace be upon you,
O son of Khadijah, the great,
Peace be upon you,
O you, the one who will be avenged by Allah, and O son of the one who will be avenged by Allah.
O unique martyr, who was killed mercilessly.
I bear witness that you established the worship of Allah,
And the poor due,
And enjoined man to do good,
And forbade them for doing wrong,
And obeyed Allah and His messenger,
Until death came to you."
------------
Image: Candles lit for Imam Hussain, his household, and companions on "Shame-Ghariban" or "Evening of the Dispossessed". People all over Iran light candles in streets to remember the tragedy of Karbala on the 10th of Muharram.

The Promise of Love

I wanted to share a very famous mystical poem (ghazal) by Imam Khomeini here. I do not find myself competent enough to comment on the deep meanings that are conveyed through subtle allegorical symbolism in this poem. But the radiance of this poem should be immediately felt by the discerning readers. I read this poem as the promise of ishq (love) to the wanderers. (Click on the below image to view in larger size.)


I have become imprisoned, O beloved, by the mole on your lip!

I saw your ailing eyes and became ill through love.

Delivered from self, I beat the drum of "I am the Real!"

Like Hallaj, I became a customer for the top of the gallows.

Heartache for the beloved has thrown so many sparks into my soul

That I have been driven to despair and become the talk of the bazaar!

Open the door of the tavern and let us go there day and night,

For I am sick and tired of the mosque and seminary.

I have torn off the garb of asceticism and hypocrisy,

Putting on the cloak of the tavern-haunting shaykh and becoming aware.

The city preacher has so tormented me with his advice

That I have sought aid from the breath of the wine-drenched profligate.

Leave me alone to remember the idol-temple,

I who have been awakened by the hand of the tavern's idol.

- Imam Khomeini

Translated by William Chittick. Similar to what we see in Urdu ghazals, it appears that the above ghazal does not have a title. Perhaps Farsi and Urdu both share this tradition/style in the ghazal genre.

I heard from a good source that Imam Khomeini wrote the above poem after the Revolution toward the end of his life. Those that consider the combination of gnostic and political a paradox should look into the lives of those that inspired him - the Prophets and the Imams and their nobles lives. As Quran describes their missions, to Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad (peace be upon them all), political was never separated from the spiritual. In fact, it was their spirituality and compassion for their fellow human beings that defined the principles of their political struggles.

For further reading, I highly recommend reading Dr. Hamid Algar's excellent essay "The Fusion of the Gnostic and the Political in the Personality and Life of Imam Khomeini" (see here).

See here for a collection of other mystical poems by Imam Khomeini (the translations are not that great though). See an interpretation of the above poem at this link.

[Edit Oct 2009: Found an Urdu translation from the backcover of a friend's book. Apologies for the poor quality of this image, taken with my cell phone. Click on the image to view larger.]

PAIN IS YOUR BEGINNING...

O' Wanderer!

Pain is your beginning...

If it were not for the pain, life would be so meaningless and absurd. The first pain is that of other hearts that you feel in your own heart. The second pain is the 'wahshat' (vacuum and agony) in your soul.

The first pain realizes the suffering of human beings around you and makes you restless. This pain is also your only attachment to them at the moment. It makes you strive for justice to better their conditions, because relentless striving is the only way you know can ease this pain.

The second pain has made your heart realize that nothing can comfort your soul except the blissful Wine from The Ultimate Reality. You also realize that this pain is as painful as the first one, but it is also different. It is in a way also a fulfillment, involving pleasure; however, this pain can also intensify over time and make the 'wahshat' much worse and tormenting, unless...

O' Wanderer, you realize that pain is an immediate inner experience that does not require any rational proof or repetition for validation. One realizes it immediately when one opens eyes in this world and expresses it through crying - crying is such a universal language of pain, for infants and adults alike. Hence, even if the whole world around you is a fiction, your pain is still real.

Life was never meaningless or absurd to you because there is pain. You felt it right from the very first moment of your presence in this world.

Pain is your beginning...

But, O' Wanderer, know that there also exist other realities and higher stations. Ishq (love) that you only through pain has many more colors which you need to discover. And along with pain, ishq can guide you to your home!

- Your Heart, the Consciousness of your Soul.

Justice and Resistance: A Tribute to Imam Ali

On this day, the 21st of Ramadhan, the day of Imam Ali's martyrdom, I would like to pay him a tribute through Dr. Ali Shariati's words.

In his speech, On the Plight of the Oppressed People, Shariati talks to the graves of those slaves who did not have any control over their lives and who were killed while building the "great" pyramids for the false glory of the kings of the time. Shariati expresses his deep pain for all the people who were oppressed throughout history, under one form of oppression or another, and even after their death, when they were erased from the pages of history altogether. Shariati sees Imam Ali as one such person, who faced the oppression, yet who stood up for justice and truth and ultimately sacrificed his life for this cause.

"My friend, I am living thousands of years after you. Witnessing all the suffering of my friends, I began to feel that the "gods" hated the slaves. Religion seemed to reinforce the slavery system. Even people more intelligent than us, like Aristotle, theorized that, by nature, some people were born to be slaves and others to be rulers. I began to believe that I was born and destined to slavery.

Amidst all of this hopelessness, I learned that a man had descended down from the mountains saying, "I have been commissioned by God." I trembled thinking that it possibly involved a new deception or new method of cruelty. He stated, "I have been commissioned by God who has promised to have mercy on slaves and those who are weak on earth." Surprise! I still could not believe it. How could it be true? God was speaking with slaves, giving them good news of being saved, and prosperous, and being heirs of the earth.

I had doubts, thinking that he was also one of those prophets of China, India, and etc. His name was Mohammed, I was told that he was an orphan who was a shepherd behind those mountains. I was so surprised. Why did God choose His prophet from among shepherds ? I was also informed that his predecessors were prophets; all were chosen from among shepherds. He was the last in that series. With joy and astonishment, I became speechless and trembled. Has God chosen His prophet from among our class ?

I began to follow him because I saw my friends around him. Some of those who became leaders of his followers were: Bilal, a slave and son of a slave whose parents were from Abyssinia, Salman, a homeless person from Persia owned as a slave, Abu-Zar the poverty stricken and anonymous fellow from the desert, and lastly, Salim, the slave of the wife of Khudhaifa and an unimportant black alien.

I believed in the prophet Mohammed since his palace was no more than just a few rooms constructed of clay. He was among the workers who carried the loads and built the rooms. His court was made of wood and palm-tree leaves. This was everything he had. This was his palace.

I fled from Persia and the ruling system of the Mobedans who pushed us as slaves into war to protect their power and rule from their enemies. I escaped and came to the Prophet's country to live with the slaves, the homeless, the helpless, and with him. But when he died, "his eyelids under the heaviness of death, curtained our shining sun." Once more, the situation began to deteriorate.

My friend, again in his name, magnificent temples rose toward the sky. Swords engraved with the Quranic verses on holy war were pointed toward us. His representatives stepped into our homes and took our youth as slaves for the chieftains of their tribes, sold our mothers in distant markets, killed our men in the name of struggle in the way of God, and looted our belongings in the name of charity.

In despair, I could do nothing! A power came into being which, with an appearance of monotheism, really hid idols in the worship-palaces of God! Tricky fires (a fire was holy in pre-Islamic Persia) were glowing. In the name of God's vicegerency and successorship of the prophets, the faces of the Pharoahs and those of the false saints joined hands. They began to strike at us in the name of law. Again, it was the yoke of slavery around our necks which promoted the construction of the Great Mosque of Damascus. The great contests to build splendid mosques, magnificent palaces, beautiful houses for the Caliphs in Damascus and the enactment of a thousand and one nights in Baghdad were all done at the expense of our blood and lives; but, this time it was pursued in the name of God! We thought there was no way to safety. Slavery and sacrifice were our unchangeable destinies!

Who was that man called Mohammad? Was his mission deceitful? Or are he (the prophet) and we being sacrificed in the system, a system in which we are decaying in prisons; witnessing the looting and destruction of our possessions and families, and being massacred ? ? ?

I do not know where to go! Where should I go? Should I go to the Mobedans (clergymen of Persia)? How could I return to those temples which were built to enslave me? Should I join those who claim to be examples of our national freedom but in essence are attempting to gain their inhuman privileges of the past? The mosques are no better than those temples!

I saw the swords which were engraved with verses on holy war. I saw the places for worship. I saw those who prayed. I saw the saintly faces who spoke in the name of spiritual leadership, the Caliphs, and the perservation of the Prophet's traditions. Nevertheless, collectively, they took us into SLAVERY! They, long before my time, put someone to the sword in a mosque. He was Ali, the son-in-law of that man of God (the prophet Mohammad). He was killed in a place where God was worshipped. He before me, and his family long before mine, were, like the suffering slaves of history, all destroyed. In the name of "charity," his house was looted before ours. The Quran long before it was used as an instrument to rob and exploit us, was raised on the swords to defeat Ali!

How strange! Five thousand years later, I found a man who spoke of God, not for the masters but for the slaves. He prayed but not to reach "Nirvana" nor to deceive people nor to unite with God (like the Persians). He prayed for the welfare and prosperity of mankind. I found a man for the whole world. He was a man of justice, one who was strong and disciplined enough to make his older brother the first subject. He was a man whose wife, the daughter of the prophet Mohammed, worked and suffered deprivation and starvation, during her lifetime as we did. I found a man whose children were the heirs of the red flag which throughout history belonged to our class.

My friend, I have sought refuge in this house which is built of clay due to my fears of the temples, pompous palaces that you know and were sacrificed for by formidable powers. The companions of the prophet are busy. The house is alone. His wife is dying while he is in the garden of Bani Najjar, working and telling God all about our misery. Fearing the terrifying temples, palaces and treasuries that have accumulated through our labor and blood, I have taken refuge in this house to mourn the sacrifices which were made!

My friend, all those who remained loyal to Ali belonged to our suffering class. He did not adopt his beautiful sermons (recorded in Nahjul-Balagha) in order to make excuses for our deprivation nor the excesses of those who seek power. They were adopted to educate and save us. He did not draw his sword to defend himself, his family, his race, nor to defend big powers. It was done to rescue us at all stages. He thinks better than Socrates, not for the sake of demonstrating mortal virtues of the noble classes in which slaves have no share, but for the sake of values which we possess. He was not an heir of the Pharoahs or those of similar class. He symbolized thoughts and considerations, not in closed libraries, schools, and academic centers like those who acquire knowledge, as an end in itself, living in the world of theories while remaining indifferent to the starving and suffering classes. His thoughts fly high and far. Simultaneously, his abstract thoughts and heart are transferred into sympathy at the sadness of an orphan's face. Concurrently, because he realizes God's greatness, while praying he does not pay attention to any suffering inflicted on his body by a daggar. However, because of oppression of a Jewish woman, he cries loud saying, "if a person dies because of this disgrace he should not be blamed!" He has excellent abilities to express himself, but never in the manner of one like Shahanama (a poet who praised kings) who makes no mention of our class except once in all of his sixty-thousand couplets.

My friend, at this time and in this community, we desperately need him. He is unlike the thinkers, philosophers and others who are either men of thoughts without action and struggle, or men of action without thoughts, wisdom, and piety. If we imagine someone beside him having all these qualities, perhaps he might not possess the tenderness of feeling, love and pure spirit. Perchance he might lack strong faith in God. He is a man whose essence is extended through all humanitarian dimensions. Like you and I, he works as a laborer. The same hands that recorded the glorious lines of divine guidance merge deep into the soil, tilling and fertilizing salty lands. He works for no one! While he makes water gush forth from the ground, his family looks at his work with joy. Before he and his wife rest, he declares, "good news for my heirs who will not have even one drop from this water as their share." My friend, he has made it a charity for you and me.

We need him. We need leadership like him. The civilizations, educational systems, and religions have made human beings into animals interested only in financial security or selfish and heartless worshippers or men of thought and reason who lack feeling, love and inspiration as well as knowledge, wisdom, and logic. But he is a man who combines all these dimensions in his persons. He is a leader of the working class and those who suffer. He is the expressing power who struggles for the well-being of the community. Sincerity, loyalty, patience, steadfastness, and the concepts of revolution and justice were the main features of his daily messages to the masses.

My friend, I live in a society where I face a system which controls half of the universe, maybe all of it. Mankind is being driven into a new stronghold of slavery. Although we are not in physical slavery, we are truely destined with a fate worse than yours! Our thoughts, hearts, and will powers are enslaved. In the name of sociology, education, art, sexual freedom, financial freedom, love of exploitation, and love of individuals, faith in goals, faith in humanitarian responsibilities and belief in one's own school of thought are entirely taken away from within our hearts! The system has converted us into empty pots which accommodate whatever is poured inside them!

Now, we in the name of party, blood, land, and system against system, undergo divisions so that each of us can be easily taken into service. His followers that is, the followers of his school of thought, are pushed to fight against one another. Why, under a global influence should they consider each other as enemies? One leaves his hands open in prayer while the other folds them together. One prostrates on a piece of clay while the other on a carpet. Fortunately less differentation is made now! Our thinkers are driven into exile; they have become guardians.

My friend, knowing that you were a slave, you could identify your master. You could endure the whip-lashed on your body. Why, how, and who made you slaves? We are facing the same destiny as yours, but unable to know why it exists. Who is making us slaves of this century? From where are we being invaded? Why are we submissive to misleading thoughts? Why are we engaged in worldly worships? Like animals, we have become victims of exploitation, even more so than your era and race!

We work for the systems, powers, machines and palaces which are maintained through our efforts. Riches are accumulated through our hard labor but our share is such a small portion; therefore, we are obliged to work the following day. We are more deprived than you! Cruelty and discrimination are more severe than that of your time!

My friend, Ali sacrificed his life for these considerations: School of Thought, Unity and Justice. It was evident in his twenty-three years of struggles and sacrifices to establish faith in the hearts of barbaric parties. It was evident in his twenty-five years of silence and endurance in order to preserve Islamic unity and save it from the dangers of the Roman and Persian empires. It was evident in his five years of work and suffering to achieve justice, using his sword to destroy hatred and liberate man. Though he was not able to achieve this, he managed to impart to us the meaning of the leadership of mankind and religion. He placed his life and the life of his family on these three slogans: School of Thought, Unity and Justice!"

THE WORLD IS THE BOOK OF GOD ALMIGHTY

I hope the readers were able to follow the ruminations in the previous six posts. The discussion started with the problem of ascertaining knowledge and culminated at outlining the Realistic Islamic Worldview.

Below I want to look at how this Realistic Islamic Worldview is presented by the Quran and how it may be applied to a few thematic issues, namely, On nature and its working, on human presence in this world, their relationship with God, and their interaction with their fellows. The Realistic perspective quite insightfully connects the natural laws, human volition, and Divine wisdom as part of the same reality. You don't need to have read the previous posts to follow the discussion here. Though, you would get the most out of it if you have read them.

To elaborate on these thematic points, I use the text from within the Quran, which is the most original and authentic source of Islamic teachings agreed upon by all Muslims. The exegesis technique adopted here may be called the 'hermeneutical circle,' which uses individual parts from the text to illuminate other parts in the same text. The individual parts are thus understood within the context of the whole text. The understanding of the whole text itself is built upon individual parts. Hence, the 'circle'. This approach does not make it impossible to interpret a text within its cultural, historical, and literary context. To my understanding, Allama Tabatabai has deployed similar techniques in his exegesis, Al-Mizan. On using thematic (topical) approach in the exegesis of the Quran, see Shaheed Sadr's discussion here.

In the beginning

Let’s begin with the story of creation in the Quran, which is rich with insightful metaphors and profound meanings.

Before the creation of Adam and Eve, God addresses all the angles, “I will create a vicegerent on earth.” The angels said, “Do you want to create a vindictive and mischievous creature to commit crime and bloodshed on earth, while we pray and glorify you?” But God said, “I know something you know not” (Quran 02:30). Note the trust endowed on humankind in Islam. From their very creation, Human beings were meant to go to earth, not as condemned sinners, but as God’s chosen representatives!

The Quran further tells us that humans are made of earth’s basest materials “clay” and “water”. But, at the same time they are possessors of “His Spirit” (32:7-9; 06:02; 21:30; 15:29; 38:72). The subtle reference to the material and spiritual composition is insightful in understanding human inclinations and desires.

Perhaps it was the material aspect that concerned the angels when they showed their apprehension about possible human conduct on earth. But humans were not meant to be merely material beings. They were to be the possessors and representatives of Divine attributes and perfection on earth including His knowledge, His creativity, His wisdom, His compassion, and His justice. Furthermore, material energies and desires in human beings have the potential to be channeled towards constructive ends.

With these talents and potentials, humankind has composed complex languages, built social relationships, and advanced rich cultures over the course of history. What more could add to human nobility, when the Quran describes the accomplishments of God’s vicegerent as signs of His Creativity and Magnificence!

“And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variations in your languages and your colors: verily in that are Signs for those who know” (30:22).

“O mankind! We created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other. Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Surely, Allah is Knowing, Aware” (49:13, also see 25:54).

The World is the Book of God Almighty

Like human intellectual capacity and creative work, the work of nature is also an expression of His sagacity and wisdom. While referring to the laws governing the nature and universe, the Quran tells us that God created the universe with measure and balance (54:49; 35:13; 06:73), and the sun, the moon, the mountains, the trees are all “His Signs” that by following their natural course “bow down in worship” to God (55:03-08; 41:39; 22:18; 41:11; 84:01-05).

In Verse 22:05, the Quran uses technical terminology to illuminate the development of an embryo with terms like “sperm”, “clot”, and “morsel of flesh.” Also mentioned in the same verse is the natural effect of rain in stirring life from barren earth. However, the verse ultimately ties the scientific explanation of both formations of life to Divine Purpose and Creation.

In the realistic outlook that the Quran presents, the natural laws, their sustenance, and the gradual changes in the universe are all Signs of God, as seen in verse 02:164:

“Most surely in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day, and the ships that run in the sea with that which profits men, and the water that God sends down from the cloud, then gives life with it to the earth after its death and spreads in it all (kinds of) animals, and the changing of the winds and the clouds made subservient between the heaven and the earth, there are signs for those who understand.”

Science, thus, complements faith in Islam. The universe is governed by a system of causes and laws, and the human free will lies in the utilization of these laws. Indeed, it is with the exercise of this free will that humankind has developed new technologies and advanced civilizations.

Islam proactively encourages its followers to advance in knowledge and science. The Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) has said, “The search of knowledge is a duty on every Muslim, male or female.”

Justice and Human Free Will

The idea of human free will is further supported by the Islamic belief in the Day of Judgment (Qayamat). Humans come to this world without any burden of original sin or predestination. Their choices in this world shape their fate in the hereafter (76:1-3; 91:1-10).

On that day, they will be rewarded or punished on the basis of choices they made in the world (02:286; 76:03). Without such choice of action, an individual’s accountability on the Day of Judgment would be against God’s justice. But the Quran explicitly declares that “Allah does not do injustice to the weight of an atom” (04:40; also see 03:108; 16:90; 16:111).

“If any do deeds of righteousness,- be they male or female - and have faith, they will enter Heaven, and not the least injustice will be done to them” (04:124).

Society and History

With the same realistic logic and affirmation of human free will, the Quran explains injustice and corruption in the world as a consequence of individual and collective choices and actions of people in the present and the past (10:44; 03:117; 03:137; 09:70).

The Quran makes the followers responsible for the betterment of their society, which is part of their test in this world; after all, “God does not change the conditions of a people until they change themselves” (13:11 and 08:53; also see 06:34; 17:77; 33:62 where similar decrees for social change and trends of history are described as “His Words” and “His Sunnat” and are fundamentally tied to human actions and their consequences).

Thus, rather than presenting a fatalistic and unconcerned attitude toward this world and its miseries, Islam exhorts its followers to actively strive toward eradicating the social ills and injustices in society (09:71; 02:148; 04:135).

The Islamic society in the Quran is based on respect, harmony, justice, and responsibility. The Quran abhors disrespect and injustice in all social relationships, be they among family members, between opposite genders, or among different ethnic and national groups (04:135; 09:71; 30:21; 02:148; 49:09). According to the Quran, killing one innocent life is like killing the whole of humanity, and saving one human life is like saving the whole of humanity (05:32).

The Quran recognizes the diversity among human languages and cultures; however, it is against the use of such an identity for the assertion of false superiority by one group over another. In the Quranic outlook, human nobility lies is one’s piety, knowledge, and struggle in God’s way (30:22; 49:13; 2:31-34; 39:09; 16:110; 61:11).

In the End

From the above discussion, we see that Islam encompasses the ideals of human freedom and nobility. It points to the realities of His Signs, His Words, and His Sunnat in nature and history. It sets noble values and goals for humanity. And, it carries the ultimate Truth about the Creator of everything (03:83; 30:30). The word “Islam” means submission, and the first condition of being a Muslim is to submit to these ideals and truths.

Such is the realization expressed in the words of Imam Ali when he said, “My Lord! I did not worship you for fear of Hell nor for a desire of Paradise. Rather I found you worthy of worship.”

The ultimate drive, the ultimate meaning behind all human struggles in this world is to gain God’s Favor and to connect with Him, the Eternal (02:285; 84:06; 02:46: 29:2-5; 76:2-3; 35:18). After that connection, there is no end!

“Surely, to Allah we belong, and to Him is our return” (02:156).

Sources consulted:

- Allama Tabatabai Al-Mizan

- Murtaza Mutahhari Fundamentals of Islamic Thought: God, Man, and the Universe (Berkeley: Mizan Press, 1985)

- Murtaza Mutahhari Man and his Destiny
- Mohammad Baqir Sadr Trends of History in Quran
- Ali Shariati Man and Islam

From Our Philosophy (V): The Realistic Islamic Worldview

The question of worldview is important because it shapes our understanding of self, our interaction with the world, its Creator, and other fellow creations. Our understanding of the world relates to the subject matter of natural and social sciences as well as philosophy and religion. So, for example, in the field of natural sciences, we can ask, how should we approach natural sciences: As a study of objective laws independent of our subjective consciousness or as just our imaginations in mind? Similarly, in the field of social sciences, we can ask, are there any objective patterns or trends that could be found in human social organization and social transformations? Similarly, we can ask, what principles and values should govern our social interactions? What should be our relation to our natural environment? Are humans only mono-dimensional beings, with just material desires and needs? Is there any purpose of this world and our presence in it?

These are important questions for the evaluation of any social and moral system. Shaheed Sadr's aim in Our Philosophy and subsequent books, as discussed earlier, is to outline a social system based on Islamic principles. He therefore considers the discussion of worldview very essential. His approach throughout this and subsequent works has been to critically evaluate and de-construct the established discourses first and then make his constructive contribution informed by his understanding of Islamic principles and values as well as that of philosophy and history.

In the following I take passages from Our Philosophy (here) and supplement them with excerpts from Sadr's another book, Trends of History in Quran (here). You will notice that the discussion done in Part I of Our Philosophy - on the possibility of knowledge through Rational Induction - was necessary so that in Part II Sadr could lay out the salient features of a Realistic Islamic worldview.

The Realistic Islamic Worldview

A) It is a false dilemma to assume that there are only two possible worldviews, the Idealistic and the Materialistic. The Idealistic view, particularly the theological idealism, accords all natural and social occurrences a hidden and divine aspect and interprets them superhumanly. The Materialistic view on the other hand says that nature and history can be fully understood without attributing the real cause to any superhuman factor, and hence God is irrelevant to scientific investigations/explanations.

B) The Realistic worldview asserts that "every phenomenon in life and nature is governed by the causative system and comes into being as the result of a sequence of causes and effects. This sequence exists everywhere in this world. For example, we take into consideration the case of the boiling of water in a kettle. It is a natural phenomenon which depends on certain conditions such as a particular degree of temperature and the nearness of the kettle to fire to a particular extent. This is the case of a sequence of a cause and its effect and a relationship of the present and the past in prearranged conditions."

Causatives also work in the domain of society and history. However, a distinguishing feature here is the intention/consciousness that is involved in the actions of the social actors. The working of nature, like the orbital movement of earth and moon, on the other hand, does not require that consciousness or intention on its part.

The effects of human actions on social and historical course depend, to a considerable extent, on the intentions behind them. This is where human volition/agency and subjectivity (basic instincts, material drives, beliefs and values, culture) become very important.

And related to human agency, there is Divine intervention into history through Prophets and Revelation. Human agency lies in their response to the Divine intervention, if they accept and act upon the message or not. Then there is also the role of direct Divine inspiration in the hearts of human beings, especially those who call upon Him in their supplication, in their intentions and actions. Further, God is not just the creator of all existence and the laws governing it, but He is also its sustainer. Meaning that He is not like a watchmaker who, once the automatic watch is made, is not needed anymore for the watch to function. Rather, the reality, the existence, matter and beyond, all are actively sustained through God's continuous provision in the Islamic perspective.

What is important to note here is that in the realistic Islamic worldview, all phenomena of the world, even miracles, are governed by certain objective principles; they are not beyond the causative logic. It affirms the possibility of a metaphysical/spiritual dimension to the world with norms and laws that are inter-related to the laws in the material dimensions. Furthermore, that humans can have access to these spiritual laws and norms just like they have access to those for the material dimensions. In fact, the Quran considers the governing principles of both natural and historical relams as well as spiritual dimensions all as part of the same reality and calls them God's "word", "sunnat", and "signs" in different contexts.

With regards to norms of history, for example, Sadr states: "...the Qur'an lays stress is the divinity of these laws and norms. Historical norms are divine in the sense that they have been appointed by Allah. The Qur'an has described them as Allah's words also. In other words every law of history is Allah's words. It is a divine rule. In order to promote man's dependence on Allah the Qur'an lays stress on the divinity and the sacred character of the historical norms. Man can enjoy the fruits of nature only with Allah's help. If he wants to enjoy the entire system of the world, he must act according to the natural laws and norms, for Allah operates His power through these norms which represent His will, wisdom and guidance."

(Trends of History in Quran, Lecture 6, "Field in which Norms of History Operate")

Further, according to Sadr, ‘the success of any activity involving social change depends upon certain concrete conditions and circumstances, and its objective cannot possibly be achieved unless these conditions and circumstances are realized’. Sadr makes a distinction between individual actions and ‘historical actions’. Humans can initiate individual actions, but for these actions to produce the desired effect on historical course, they need to be done through understanding the dynamics and limitations of external social conditions. Just like, how in the natural environment, Humans can bring about effective change (only) by understanding the laws that govern it.

C) The difference between the realistic and materialistic worldviews lies in this question: " 'If we accept an objective reality of the world, do we stop with objectivity at the limit of sensible matter, which would thus be the common cause of all the phenomena of existence and being, including the phenomena of consciousness and knowledge; or do we seep beyond it to a further cause, an eternal and an infinite cause, as the primary cause of what we know of the world, including both its spiritual and its material realms?' "

(Our Philosophy, Part II, Chapter One)

D) The Realistic worldview (also called theological realism) "accepts an external reality of the world and nature. Both spirit and matter, according to this notion, are attributed to a cause beyond the world and nature. "

E) "The theological notion of the world does not mean dispensing with natural causes or rebelling against any one of the sound scientific truths. Rather, it is the notion that considers God as a cause beyond [nature]. It imposes on the chain of agents and causes an ascent to a power above nature and matter. With this, opposition between it and any scientific truth is completely removed. The reason for this is that it gives science the widest opportunity for discovering the mysteries and order of nature.

At the same time, in the last analysis, it retains for itself the theological explanation which is the positing of a higher cause in a principle above nature and matter. Hence, the theological issue is not as its opponents wish to claim - namely, an issue concerning an invisible hand that sprinkles water in the atmosphere, that conceals the sun from us, or that acts as an obstacle between us and the moon, thus creating rain, a sun eclipse, or a moon eclipse. If science reveals the causes of rain and the factors leading to its evaporation; and further, if science also reveals the causes of the sun's eclipse, and [if] we know that the celestial spheres are not equidistant from the earth, that the moon is closer to them than to the sun, and that it happens that the moon passes between the earth and the sun, thus concealing the sun's light from us; again; if science reveals the cause of the moon's eclipse, which is the passing of the moon in the shadow of the earth - this shadow extends behind the earth for around 900,000 miles - I say that if this information is available to a human being, then those materialists will imagine that the theological issue will no longer have a subject, and the invisible hand, which conceals from us the sun or the moon, is substituted for by the natural causes given by science.

However, this is only due to the misunderstanding of the theological issue, and to the undifferentiation of the place of the theological cause in the chain of causes."

(Our Philosophy, Part II, Chapter One)

F) "...the Qur'an does not accord a hidden aspect to an event to sever its connection with everything else and attribute it direct to Allah. The Qur'an recognizes the existence of mutual relationship between various historical events in this world, but according to it this relationship is an expression of the wisdom and sagacity of Allah in regard to the creation and management of this world including the field of historical events.

To make this point clear and to illustrate the two points of view in this respect, we can use the following example:

Sometimes a man may say that it rains by the will of Allah. In this case he puts Allah's will in the place of natural causes as if he thinks that rain is a phenomenon which has no connection with any other happening and is directly attributable to Allah. This explanation of rain is different from its scientific explanation. Accordingly another man may say that the phenomenon of rain requires some cause and it is connected with other natural event. In fact there is a natural cycle of different forms of water. Water evaporates and converts into gas. Gases ascend and form clouds. The clouds gradually come down and with a change in temperature, again convert into liquid and rain. This series of natural events again represents Allah's wisdom and His good management of the affairs of the world, and there is no contradiction between the two explanations, although in the first explanation the mundane causes of the phenomenon have been ignored and the phenomenon has been attributed direct to Allah.

That is why the Qur'an, while according the norms of history a divine aspect, does not interpret history superhumanly alone. It only lays stress on the fact that the norms of history are not beyond the scope of the power of Allah. Their materialization depends on His will. Laws of nature are the words of Allah, His method and an embodiment of His will and wisdom in the world. They are meant to remind man to be always conscious of his dependence on Allah so that there may exist a close link between science and faith and man may look at scientific phenomena with the conviction of his faith in Allah.

The Qur'an believes in the basicity of the norms of history and does not regard any event as accidental. In many cases it considers even supernatural events to be subservient to the norms of history and not mere chance happenings. Accordingly even divine help is governed by the laws of history. In other words it is received only in appropriate conditions. In this sensitive spiritual field also the Qur'an insists on basing the interpretation of history on logic, reason and science, and not on unplanned aid. According to this interpretation divine help must be in conformity with the laws of history."

(Trends of History in Quran, Lecture 5, "Norms of History in the Quran")

G) "As for 'spiritualism' in the theological sense, or in the theological doctrine, it is a method of viewing reality as a whole, and not as a specific realm opposite the material realm. Hence, the theology that asserts a supernatural, immaterial cause also asserts a link between all that exists in the general realm - be that spiritual or material - and the supernatural cause. It believes that this link is one in whose light the human practical- and social position regarding all things must be determined. Spiritualism in the theological sense is a method for comprehending reality. It is equally applicable to the material realm and to the spiritual realm in the idealistic sense."

(Our Philosophy, Part II, Chapter One)

H) "... materialism is a philosophical tendency, as is theology. We do not have scientific or experimental materialism; for science, as we have learned, does not affirm the materialistic notion of the world in order that materialism be scientific. Rather, all the truths and secrets that science discloses about the sphere of nature leave room for the assumption of a cause above matter. Scientific experimentation cannot prove, for example, that matter is not created by an immaterial cause, or that the forms of movement and the kinds of development which science has discovered in the various aspects of nature are self-sufficient and not produced by a cause above the limits and sphere of experimentation. The same is true of every scientific truth. Therefore, the proof in support of materialism cannot be based on scientific truths or direct sense experience. Rather, it is formulated in a philosophical interpretation of those truths and experiences, precisely as is the proof in support of theology."

(Our Philosophy, Part II, Chapter One)

I) "The ... question is as follows: 'If scientific experimentation is not sufficient by itself for demonstrating the theological and the materialistic notions alike, then is it possible for the human mind to find evidence for any of the two notions, since both of them lie outside the realm of experimentation, or must the mind yield to skepticism, to freeze the theological and materialistic issue, and to limit itself to the fruitful field of science?'

The answer is that human intellectual capacity is sufficient for studying this issue and for commencing with respect to it from experimentation itself, not by considering experimentation as a direct proof for the notion which we form about the world, but as a starting point. Thus, the proper philosophical notion of the world - the theological notion - will be posited by the independent rational information in light of the interpretation of experiments and the experimental phenomena.

No doubt the reader remembers our study in the first investigation concerning the theory of knowledge of the rational doctrine, and how we demonstrated the presence of independent rational knowledge in a way that shows that the addition of rational knowledge to sense experience is something necessary not only with respect to our philosophical issue but also with respect to all scientific issues. There is no scientific theory that rests on a purely empirical basis. Rather, it rests on the basis of sense experience and in light of independent rational knowledge. Therefore, our philosophical issue that investigates the supernatural world does not differ from any scientific issue that investigates one of the natural laws, or that reveals some natural powers (p. 217) or secrets. In all of this, sense experience is the point of departure. But in spite of that, sense experience is in need of a rational explanation if a philosophical or a scientific truth is to be inferred from it."

(Our Philosophy, Part II, Chapter One)

From Our Philosophy (IV): The Logic of Science

Students of natural and social sciences should find the passage quoted from Our Philosophy in this post especially insightful.

Let me start off with a quick summary of what has been discussed so far. We have discussed Descartes' particular version of Rationalism, which is based on his Cartesian Method of doubt, also Hume's Empiricism, and then Berkeley's Idealism in the previous posts. It may be appropriate now to discuss the logic of scientific research in Shaheed Sadr's view.

That is, how do we obtain and ascertain knowledge about nature and its laws. In Sadr's view, the logic of scientific research is based on rational induction (see below). What is interesting about this discussion of rational induction is that it is applicable to both natural and social sciences, as we see that in the later chapters of Our Philosophy under the heading of a Realistic outlook of the world. In fact, Shaheed Sadr further expands this rational-realistic logic in his two other books, namely 'The Logical Foundation of Induction' (here, but translation not very good) and 'The Revealer, the Messenger, The Message' (here), to layout a unifying, common logic of scientific research in religious, social, and natural sciences. I will write more on the realistic worldview in my next post, inshallah.

What is this rational induction and how is it different from a purely materialist, sense perception/experiment based induction, here is what Shaheed Sadr says:

"We conclude from this that the empirical doctrine unavoidably leads to the elimination of the principle of causality and to the failure of demonstrating necessary relations between things. But if the principle of causality is eliminated, all the natural sciences will collapse, since they depend on it, as you will know.

The natural sciences, which the empiricists seek to establish on the basis of pure experimentation, are themselves in need of primary rational principles that are prior to experimentation. This is because the scientist carries out his experiment in his laboratory on limited objective particulars. Then he puts forward a theory for explaining the phenomena that the experiment in the laboratory had disclosed, and for justifying them by one common cause. This is exemplified in the theory that states that the cause of heat is motion, on the basis of a number of experiments interpreted in this way. It is our right to ask the natural scientist about how he offers this theory as a universal law applicable to all circumstances resembling those of the experiment, even though the experiment did not apply except to a number of specific things. Is it not the case, then, that this generalization is based on a principle stating that similar circumstances and things alike in kind and reality must share in laws and decrees? Here, once again, we inquire about how the mind reached this principle. The empiricists cannot claim that it is an empirical principle. Rather, it must be a piece of rational knowledge that is prior to experimentation. The reason is that if it were supported by experimentation, then the experimentation on which this principle is based also, in turn, treats only specific subjects. How, then, can a general principle be based on it? Thus, the establishment of a general principle or a universal law in light of one or more experiments cannot be accomplished except after admitting prior rational knowledge.

With this, it becomes clear that all the empirical theories in the natural sciences are based on a number of pieces of rational knowledge that are not subject to experimentation. Rather, the mind accepts them immediately. They are the following:

1. The principle of causality, in the sense of the impossibility of chance. That is, if chance were possible, then it would not be possible for the natural scientist to reach a common explanation of the numerous phenomena that appear in his experimentation.

2. The principle of harmony between cause and effect. This principle states that things that in reality are similar necessarily depend on a common cause.

3. The principle of non-contradiction that asserts that it is impossible for negation and affirmation to be true simultaneously.

If the scientist accepts these pieces of knowledge that are prior to experimentation, and then carries out his various experiments on the kinds and divisions of heat, he can, in the last analysis, postulate a theory for explaining the different kinds of heat by one cause, such as motion, for example. On the whole, it is not possible to postulate this theory as a decisive and an absolute one. The reason is that it can be such only if it is possible for one to be certain of the absence of another explanation of those phenomena, and of the incorrectness of explaining them by another cause. However, in general, this is not determined by experiments. That is why the conclusions of the natural sciences are, for the most part, presumptive, due to a deficiency in experiments, and to an incompleteness in the conditions that make them decisive experiments.

It becomes clear to us from what has preceded that the inference of a scientific conclusion from an experiment is always dependent on syllogistic reasoning in which the human mind moves from the general to the specific, and from the universal to the particular, exactly as viewed by the rational doctrine. The scientist is able to draw the conclusion in the above example by moving from the already mentioned three primary principles (the principle of causality, the principle of harmony, and the principle of non-contradiction) to that specific conclusion in accordance with the syllogistic approach.

Regarding the objection raised by the empiricists against the method of syllogistic reasoning- namely, that the conclusion in it is nothing but an echo of one of the two premises, that is, the major premise, and a repetition of it- it is a bad objection, according to the teachings of the rational doctrine. This is because if we intended to demonstrate the major premise by experiments, and had no other criterion, then we would have to examine all the divisions and kinds, in order to be certain of the soundness of the judgment. The conclusion then would have been also determined in the major premise itself. But if the major premise were a piece of rational knowledge, which we grasp without need of experiments, such as the primary intuitive propositions and the rational theories that are derived from such propositions, then he who seeks to demonstrate the major premise does not need to examine the particulars so that the conclusion is necessitated to take on the quality of repetition and reiteration.

Once again, we assert that we do not deny the great value of experience for humanity and the extent of its service in the fields of knowledge. However, we wish to make the empiricists understand that experiments are not the primary criterion and the fundamental source of human thought and knowledge. Rather, the primary criterion and the fundamental source are rational primary information, in whose light we acquire all other information and truths. Even experience itself is in need of such a rational criterion. Thus, we and others alike are required to admit this criterion on which the principles of our metaphysical philosophy are based. If, after that, the empiricists attempt to deny this criterion in order to falsify our philosophy, they would be, at the same time, attacking the principles that are the foundation of the natural sciences, and without which the empirical experience is completely fruitless.

In light of the rational doctrine, we can explain the quality of necessity and absolute certainty that distinguish mathematics from the propositions of the natural sciences. This distinction is due to the fact that the necessary mathematical laws and truths are supported by the primary principles of the mind, and do not depend on the discoveries of experiments. The scientific propositions are contrariwise. Thus, the expansion of iron due to heat is not one of the propositions that are given by those principles with no mediation, but is based on experimental propositions. The decisive rational character is the secret of the necessity and absolute certainty in the mathematical truths."

Source: Our Philosophy by Baqir Sadr. Trans. Shams C. Inati. See part I chapter I "The Primary Source of Knowledge."

From Our Philosophy (III): To Exist is to Know - Really?

How Can We Be Sure Of What We Know?

You may have seen a very absorbing presentation by the popular Turkish scholar, Harun Yahya, entitled “Secret Beyond Matter” (see here). And you might have noticed a similarity between his argument and the one presented by the idealist philosopher George Berkeley (A.D. 1685-1753), who argued that, philosophically speaking, we are incapable of proving the existence of any reality outside of our minds. I am sympathetic to Harun Yahya’s overall project – of pushing modern science and humanities to expand their intellectual horizon and of promoting general Islamic education through creative media – but regarding this particular issue I did not find him very convincing. I believe that the criticism that Shaheed Baqir al-Sadr (A.D. 1935-1980) made against Berkeley’s Philosophical Idealism in his wonderful book, Our Philosophy (see here), also applies to Harun Yahya’s argument. Below, I do not get into the specifics of Yahya’s presentation; I only discuss the overall framework of his argument that I believe is very close to philosophical idealism. I do encourage you to watch his presentation. Later in this piece, I touch upon the implications that this theory may have on our understanding of ourselves and the things that happen around us.

‘I Think, Therefore I Exist’ - Really?

First, let me discuss Rene Descartes (A.D. 1596-1650) because Harun Yahya starts his presentation by posing a problem similar to that of Descartes. That is, can we distinguish a dream from reality? In other words, how do we really know if any thing exists outside of our brains when we do not have a direct ‘touch’ with the essence of that outside world except through the signals that our physical senses send to our brains? For illustration, Descartes uses a piece of wax which is exposed to heat: We get different perceptions, different feelings, of its solid and liquid states through our five physical senses, but the actual ‘thing’ that is changing its physical state with changing temperature, we do not have a direct access to that essence or existence. Descartes pushes the argument further and poses a scenario: What if there is no reality out there and all that we consider to be reality are just signals artificially created and sent to our brains. For the purpose of illustration, imagine the mechanistic web or system in the movie, The Matrix, where individual brains were fed with signals suggesting an artificial, virtual reality. What if there is just one brain imagining all of that virtual experience? How can we be sure of what we know about reality?

Descartes’ thesis builds upon his famous Cartesian method of doubt, in which he becomes skeptical about the truth of all of his beliefs, not taking any reality for granted. From this point zero, he constructs an argument for, first, his own existence, then God, and all other external reality. The very famous argument, cogito ergo sum, “I think, therefore I exist” was proposed in this process. However, this argument has some serious logical flaws. In Our Philosophy, al-Sadr argues that Descartes pre-supposes the ‘individual being’ who is doing the thinking and also pre-supposes the ‘law of causality’ as an objective reality through the application of which Descartes connects the action of ‘thinking’ to the individual ‘being’. Al-Sadr states that Ibne Sina, or Avicenna (A.D. 980-1037), already presented this argument and criticized it “as being unfit as a method of scientific evidence for the existence of the human thinker himself” a few centuries prior to Descartes.

Descartes may not have been very successful at the solution, but the problem and the method of doubting reality that he constructed became quite popular, especially with the skeptics. Harun Yahya uses such a skeptic argument at the beginning of his presentation to problematize the empiricist scientific method or the material-istic theory of knowledge. The empiricist method presumes material objects to have an objective reality with real substance and governing laws. Following Descartes, Harun Yahya also argues that we cannot be sure of their existence. The alternative theory of knowledge that Yahya presents is very similar to Berkeley’s Idealism, and equally problematic.

‘To Exist Is To Know’ – Perhaps Not!

Now, let me discuss Berkeley’s Idealism, however, at the risk of simplifying it too much. Like Descartes, Berkeley questions our ability to know and validate any reality outside of our individual minds. He gives an illustration on the following line: Take two buckets of water, one with very hot and the other with very cold water. Put one hand in the hot, the other in the cold water. Now put both hands in a third bucket with water at room temperature. Each hand will feel different temperature of the same water because of its previous experience: the water will appear cold to the hot hand, and hot to the cold hand. But, is the water in the third bucket really hot and cold at the same time? On the basis of this apparent contradiction in sense perception, Berkeley argues that we cannot rely on the validity of our senses and any scientific knowledge built upon them. This is yet another construction of the skeptic argument, similar to Descartes’. Al-Sadr points out that Berkeley even goes to the extent of denying the objective existence of water when he draws out that contradiction in his little experiment. For him water is nothing but a name that we give to our sense perceptions.

To resolve this skeptic problem, Berkeley presents his Idealistic theory of knowledge. For Berkeley, ‘To exist is to know, or to be known.’ Existence of a thing has a different meaning in his philosophy, which is basically the idea or knowledge of that thing in our mind or soul. The source of that knowledge is God, who causes this idea or knowledge in our minds. Berkeley is vague in what exactly does he mean by ‘existence’, but if we try to understand his philosophy by reading it in its extreme idealistic terms, reality is but a continuous creation of perceptions or knowledge in our mind caused by God. Harun Yahya also appears to be arguing the same thing in his presentation.

But the fact that there can be error in the way we perceive nature does not automatically mean that nature does not exist. Rather, it is the fault of our sense perception and perhaps also of our inductive reasoning if we are not able to reconcile the different temperatures we get from the same water. In fact, the contradiction itself can be an argument to prove that there is an external reality (water) outside of our mind from which we are receiving mixed sense perceptions. While making this point, al-Sadr goes into a lengthy discussion on the problems with Berkeley’s theory in the second chapter of his book, under the sub-heading “Philosophical Idealism”. Al-Sadr’s solution to the skeptic argument is a Realistic Theory of Knowledge which is different from both a narrow empiricist (material-istic) epistemology – quite prevalent in modern science today – as well as philosophical Idealism. Al-Sadr elaborates this theory further, particularly its application in the domain of history and society, in his book, Trends of History in Quran (See here). The Realistic theory of knowledge accepts the possibility of an external world outside of individual minds along with its natural and metaphysical laws. It is also open to the possibility of vast and limitless realities beyond the material dimensions of the universe. I highly recommend you to read these two works for details.

Flawed Logic – So What?

Let me discuss a couple of problematic implications of philosophical idealism. This, I hope, will also highlight the relevance of this debate, especially for the students of science and humanities.

Consider the following illustration. You may have seen the movie, The Matrix. Recall the scene in which Neo meets a young boy who bends the spoon by changing the idea or knowledge of that spoon in his (boy’s) mind; Neo also sees this change. If reality only exists in one’s mind then the spoon should only bend for the young boy. But since Neo also sees this, then either Neo is also part of that young boy’s imagination and therefore the boy is able to manipulate Neo’s perceptions, or the two are experiencing a collective dream, but which has some objective dynamics and existence, outside of their individual minds, and the boy is merely manipulating those dynamics through his mind power. However, in case one argues that Neo is also part of the young boy’s imagination, this leads to a philosophical position known as Solipsism, which states that ‘the only thing that exists is my mind’ or ‘my mind is the only thing that I know for sure exists.’ Even God becomes merely a proposition – some would say, a mental construction – in this philosophical position. I believe that Berkeley and Harun Yahya both fall into this philosophical trap in their proposed theory of knowledge.

A very basic question that could be asked to the Idealists is that if we eliminate ‘I’ or ‘consciousness’ from the equation, does that mean the whole existence would not exist any more? Is that the right way to think about reality for the purpose of building our scientific and historical knowledge? Albert Einstein once said that “I think that a particle must have a separate reality independent of the measurements. That is an electron has spin, location and so forth even when it is not being measured. I like to think that the moon is there even if I am not looking at it.” But, following Berkeley and Yahya, if we assume that reality does not have an objective existence, we may not be able to study it from the perspective of objective nature and laws. The idealist theory of knowledge also does not provide an independent criterion to distinguish true propositions from false propositions we may have in our minds; for example, the idea of God vs. the idea of a pink unicorn. Hence Berkeley’s idealism doesn’t help much either in solving the skeptic problem of validating knowledge.

Consider another implication. God, no doubt, is the ultimate explanation for all occurrences in the world. God is the originator and sustainer of all creation. But the Idealistic perspective does not give us any objective criterion to differentiate between various occurrences, so we can increase our systematic knowledge of science and history, something toward which the Quran frequently draws attention of those who reflect (see, for instance, verses 2:164, 88:17-20, 7:185, and 50:6 in the Qur’an).

For example, the tragic Katrina and the catastrophic earthquake in the Iranian city of Bam both may have happened because God allowed, or caused, them to happen. But can we move beyond this general statement to understand how Katrina and Bam may have similar or different natural and/or meta-physical causes. Does the idealistic perspective give us any direction? And, further, can we demand an objective criterion or test from those idealists who like to call Katrina a wrath of God but consider the Bam earthquake as just a natural occurrence. (Or, those for whom both were punishments of God. Or, those for whom both were just natural occurrences, albeit caused by God). Granted, many times calamities befall on people because of their wrong doings. This general statement or metaphysical law is endorsed by the Quran. However, this statement by itself cannot prove that a specific calamity in a certain area happened as a form of punishment from God. The calamity could very well have been an effect of a natural process (the strain caused by underground tectonic plates, for example. Granted, the calamity could still be interpreted as a punishment. But it could also be a form of God’s test on a people. And there can be many more such interpretations). The idealistic perspective does not help much with making any such scientific or discursive distinctions. The realistic perspective at least would not allow any blank statements to be taken as decisive explanations, even if it may not always explain the meta-physical dimensions of such natural calamities.

The idealistic philosophy is similarly unsatisfactory for expanding our knowledge of physics, biology, medicine, criminology, historiography, and philosophy. Philosophical idealism has a certain attraction for some Sufi leaning philosophies. But this theory of knowledge does not take us very far in terms of developing a unified perspective of reality (material and non-material) and advancing human knowledge and capacities.

For a comparison of the Idealistic and the Realistic perspectives on the topic of ‘fate and destiny,’ see Shaheed Murtaza Mutahhari’s book, Man and His Destiny (see here). On biological evolution, see Mutahhari’s The Quran and the Nature of Life (here) and Shaheed M. Hosseini Behishti and Shaheed M. Javad Bahonar’s Philosophy of Islam (here). You may also want to read Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabatabai’s marvelous book, ‘Usoole Falsifae va Ravish-e-Realism’ (The Principles of Philosophy and the Method of Realism), available in Farsi.